Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to compliment the "Dean" of the House for his fine statement. I would like to remind him that on May 22 the Nation observed Maritime Day. On that same day the President issued a proclamation. Let me quote just a few sentences from that proclamation where they are relevant to the business here today:

Throughout American history, the merchant marine has been indispensable to our security and prosperity. Today, our merchant fleet binds us in peaceful commerce with the increasingly interdependent nations of the world. Merchant ships carry the essentials of life to millions in need. They transport military supplies and equipment to our forces abroad. Of all our supplies being sent to Vietnam today, 98 percent are carried by ship.

Mr. Chairman, I agree with the President and I disagree with our friend, Mr. Boyd, and I as one will do all in my power to see that a bigger merchant marine is built in American shipyards.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CELLER. Thank you, sir. Thank all of you.

The CHAIRMAN. We will hear now from another committee member, Mr. Byrne.

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES A. BYRNE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

Mr. BYRNE. Not too long ago, Mr. Chairman, this Nation celebrated Maritime Day. But as far as I'm concerned, these hearingsand the eventual passage of the legislation now before you will more accurately be cause for celebration than that recent observance was. In fact, I would hope that, when this legislation for maritime independence becomes law, we give serious consideration to making that day-and not May 22-Maritime Day in the future.

At the time of the recent observance, President Johnson issued a proclamation saying that Maritime Day was designed to "remind Americans of the important role which the merchant marine plays in our national life."

Let me quote just a few sentences from that proclamation, for they have relevance to the business here today.

Throughout American history, the merchant marine has been indispensable to our security and prosperity. Today, our merchant fleet binds us in peaceful commerce with the increasingly interdependent nations of the world. Merchant ships carry the essentials of life to millions in need. They transport military supplies and equipment to our forces abroad. Of all our supplies being sent to Vietnam today, 98 percent are carried by ship.

These are noble words, Mr. Chairman. They reflect the kind of respect which our merchant marine deserves from the Nation's Chief Executive. They are the kind of words with which no right-thinking American can quarrel, for they pay tribute to an industry which is vital to our international commerce and our defense.

While I admire the President's proclamation, I must confess I'm a little confused, Mr. Chairman. The President's concern about our merchant marine does not seem to be reflected in the plans and schemes of some of the members of his official family.

The Secretary of Transportation, for example, recently went before a Senate committee and presented a program that would involve the

building of a significant number of American-flag merchant ships in foreign yards. How can you have a merchant fleet which, in the words of the President, is "indispensable to our *** prosperity" when the ships would be built with foreign materials, by foreign workers, in some foreign country?

Or take the position of the Secretary of Defense. Repeatedly, in recent years, he has downgraded the role of our commercial shipping in relation to our national defense. He has on earlier occasions said that we don't need to build more commercial vessels to satisfy our defense requirements, and then on other occasions has asked for a multibillion-dollar fleet all his own, to be used in case of international

crisis.

How can you have a merchant fleet which, in the words of the President, is "indispensable to our security" if we shortchange American ship operators who want to build more ships, or if we put our reliance for a sealift on a costly, ill-conceived scheme to put floating warehouses on station around the globe?

There are many more examples of these contradictions within the official administration family, Mr. Chairman. The Secretary of Agriculture cuts the ground out from under our merchant fleet on the carriage of food cargoes abroad. The Secretary of the Interior provides safeguards for every segment of American life adversely af fected by oil imports, except the merchant marine. The Secretary of State tries to buy political advantage with other countries at the expense of our merchant marine.

All these day-to-day actions by the administration tend to make the noble words of the Presidential proclamation sound, to say the least, a little hollow. And it is the day-to-day actions of the administration that have brought our merchant marine to its present precarious posi tion-outnumbered on the high seas; outclassed in terms of speed and newness; almost out of the picture, in terms of new construction going on in our own shipyards.

The American flag is coming down on the oceans of the worldand as it comes down, we lose our commercial competitive advantage. we lose our national defense capability, we lose our prestige, and we lose out on the balance of payments.

We have been observing Maritime Day in this country for some time. And there was a time, Mr. Chairman, when we backed up our words with action, as the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 clearly proved. Three decades ago, the Maritime Administration was an independent agency-charged by Congress with the responsibility for seeing to it that we had an American-owned, American-built and Americanmanned merchant fleet that was second to none.

The Congress never repealed the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, Mr. Chairman; it's still the law of the land. But what has happened is that administration after administration has ignored the law, and has failed to carry out its clear intent. And so our fleet has grown smaller and smaller, and it has grown older and older, so that foreignflag vessels carry all but a mere 8 percent of our waterborne foreign

commerce.

We've got to build that merchant fleet back to its former position as the best in the world. We've already started to do something about

it by passage in the House of the bill calling for annual authorization legislation. Through this measure, we'll make sure that the Congress-and not the penny pinchers in the Budget Bureau-decides how much money should be spent on ship construction and ship operation, and the best ways to spend that money so that we get the greatest maritime value for our dollar.

We also have to enact this legislation-of which I am a cosponsor, to give the Maritime Administration back its independence, so that it won't be kicked around from one bureaucratic pigeonhole to another. An independent agency will be able to hammer out a program, based on the same "build-American" concept that was spelled out in 1936, that will make sure that we replace our small, old, unseaworthy ships with fast, safe, and efficient vessels that can compete with the other maritime powers.

Once we have achieved these goals, Mr. Chairman, we will give real meaning-at long last-to the words in the President's proclamation that the merchant marine is "indispensable to our security and prosperity."

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions?

Mr. Byrne, we thank you for a very helpful statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Our next witness is a member of our committee who has introduced H.R. 4723, Mr. Helstoski.

STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY HELSTOSKI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. HELSTOSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, gentlemen of the committee: I wish to thank you for the opportunity to present my views on legislation which would establish an independent Federal Maritime Administration.

The primary purpose of the legislation now being considered by this committee is to establish an independent agency which would concern itself solely with the problems of our merchant marine. My bill, H.R. 4723, would do just that.

When this Congress established a Cabinet-level Department of Transportation, it, in its good judgment, excluded the Maritime Administration from being absorbed into the new Department and, rightfully so, because our merchant marine fleet is commerce. It is unlike other forms of transportation. The functions of the merchant marine is in the field of coastal transit and foreign commerce. Navigation on the high seas, and its activities and functions are thus outside of the jurisdiction of the United States.

We have gone far enough in neglecting America's seapower to where we are presently classified as a third-rate status and we should make every effort we possibly can to reverse this trend through the upgrading of the agency which oversees the functions of the merchant marine. In establishing a Federal Maritime Administration, we are taking a step forward to revitalize our merchant marine, to restore it to a position of leadership among the maritime nations.

Our Nation is the leading trading nation in the world, yet the U.S. merchant marine carries less than 8 percent of this ocean-borne foreign commerce. And even this small percentage will drop in the

foreseeable future unless steps are taken now to revitalize our maritime operations.

The American merchant marine, which was the finest after World War II, has fallen from the top rung of the ladder among maritime nations. This is the result of the short-sighted policies of some of our Government officials who did not, or did not wish to understand the significance of commercial seapower.

Our shipbuilding endeavors and capacities should be increased so that our greatest source of sea transportation will get back to the strength where we will not have to rely upon foreign shipping to provide us with the goods which are so vital to our economy and the national security of the United States.

Mr. Chairman, the need for an expanded ship force in the U.S. merchant marine has been vividly brought into focus during the recent

middle-eastern crisis.

The Arab-Israeli war caused a temporary shutdown of most oil production in the Arab nations of the Middle East and North Africa. Because of this, Europe is not getting oil from that area, and the United States Foreign Petroleum Supply Committee was called into session to initiate an emergency oil lift to Europe, from the oil resources of American companies having overseas operations. The committee has been asked by the Government to make a survey of the needs and available supplies and transportation facilities.

Even before this session was held, it was noted that deliveries would be slowed down because of a tanker shortage.

While there is nothing that we can do to alleviate this shortage of the moment, an independent Maritime Administration could undertake to build the ships required to bring our merchant fleet to a place of prestige among the maritime nations of the world.

An increase in shipbuilding would reactivate many of the closed shipyards of this Nation, thus giving our national economy an additional boost. On the basis of employment alone, a revitalized shipbuilding program would provide expanded job opportunities in the shipyards and in such industries which would supply many of the components which go into a modern ship.

In conjunction with the expanding physical properties of our mer chant marine, we must also take immediate steps to increase the num ber of qualified seagoing personnel. We must train our young men for the merchant marine to take over the duties of our skilled seagoing per sonnel, of which better than half are 45 years of age or over.

Today there is no overall national policy on the operations of our merchant marine, there is no definite national program, no agency that is capable of implementing such a policy or program, and no bud

get for the development of our ocean-going transit system.

Today, in the U.S. Government there are at least 22 separate agen cies engaged in activities of ocean-going programs in some way or another. Each of these programs is funded by means of separate appropriations which tend to duplicate some of the activities which have also been underway in other agencies.

An independent Maritime Administration, unhampered by any other Government department or agency, could restore our merchant marine fleet and its operational personnel to the level where we could

point to it with pride. Our maritime agency desperately needs an agency to give it a definite sense of direction. I am hopeful we will find it in a new maritime administration. Had such an agency been established some 20 years ago, we would have avoided the problems we face today.

Mr. Chairman, I urge favorable and speedy action on this proposed legislation and wish to again thank you for giving me the opportunity to present my views on the need to adopt this legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Helstoski, for a very helpful statement concerning this legislation.

Are there any questions? Thank you.

Mr. HELSTOSKI. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Hon. G. Robert Watkins, the gentleman from Pennsylvania and a valuable member of this committee, will be our next witness. Mr. Watkins.

STATEMENT OF HON. G. ROBERT WATKINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

Mr. WATKINS. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Our merchant marine fleet has been in a state of sharp and continuing decline for many years. But, the very fact that this committee has before it for consideration over 100 bills, all aimed at rejuvenating that fleet by establishing an independent Federal Maritime Administration gives me personal confidence that the United States faces a brighter future as a maritime power.

I have, as you know, been privileged to sit as a member of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries since I came to the Congress in 1965. In that position and during that relative short period of time, I have become all too aware of the declining position of our merchant marine fleet.

It was my concern over this situation, which led me to introduce one of the many bills before you today, H.R. 6179, with the purpose of establishing an independent Federal Maritime Administration. I think the concern of the entire Congress is evidenced by the large number of bills introduced this session on this subject. While some differ in technical and administrative aspects, all are pointed toward one goal-an agency, independent of any other Government department or bureau, devoted to furthering and speeding up the advance of our merchant marine fleet.

I am convinced, as you must be, that this can only be accomplished by restoring the independent status once enjoyed by this agency when it was called the Federal Maritime Board.

The needs of the U.S. merchant marine have been completely ignored. Transferring the Maritime Administration from the Department of Commerce to the new Department of Transportation would simply represent an organizational shift from one bureaucratic maze to another and would furnish no assurance that the needs of the maritime industry would not be completely overshadowed by more powerful groups representing other means of transportation. To me, such a move, is neither logical nor practical.