Sen. Byrd State* View*

Sen. Byrd State* View*

‘ On Price Control Bill

An analysis given to me by the • Legislative Counsel of the United States-Senate makes it clear that the pending control bill does not require the President to control wages in the event that price controls are established.

Mr. Baruch emphasized in his testimony before the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency, that no price control plan could be effective unless wage control was established coincident with price control. This is unquestionably true, as wages constitute a very large part of the cost of all manufactured articles and agricultural products.

I announced my support of price ceilings providing wages are controlled simultaneously with prices. This the pending bill does not require the President to do and is so worded as to leave wage control to his own determination as to whether his failure tp do so would constitute an “undue burden” upon companies producing articles upon which he places price ceilings. '

The main purpose of this legislation is to prevent inflation. It would be a farce to pass a bill that does not make .wage control mandatory when price controls are established. Such a course would not stop inflation and may result very disastrously to our economic system.

For myself, 1 cannot support any legislation that does not effectively establish both controls coincident one with the other. I am fortified in this opinion by the statement from the Legislative _Counsel of hte Senate, _ _ ..

I hope on Monday the Senate will amend the pending bill in this respect and further provide for a definite expiration date of July 1, 1951, thus enabling a review by the next Congress.

I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record as a part of my remarks a copy of the analysis of S. 3986, as prepared at my request by the Senate Legislative Counsel.