NER Washington forum; Crime in America

Well it's difficult I think to make comparisons but probably it is the most important domestic problem we face today. The voice you just heard was that of United States Representative Richard H Palme Republican of Virginia. Our guest this week on the NDE all our Washington forum a weekly program concerned with the significant issues before us as a nation. This week got discussion of crime in America. I many our public affairs director Bill Greenwood our guest Congressman PA is currently serving as chairman of the Republican taskforce on crime a blue ribbon group of lawmakers who have been most vocal recently in their criticism of the lawlessness in the United States. Congressman Papas what first question tell us about the taskforce on crime. What is it and what does it do. They had Task Force on crime. It is an organizational unit of the Republican members of the House of Representatives specifically. We are a sub unit

of the planning in the search committee. I was named chairman of the group then Bob Taft of all had was named deputy chairman. It is I think our function first of all to dramatize the nature and scope of the crime problem by conducting the research necessary to do that. And secondly it is our phone it to act as a catalytic agent in achieving some legislative solution to this monstrous problem. But what has the task force done to this date. The task force has met weekly since it was first organized in the spring. It bi weekly meetings we consider a subject which has at that previous meeting been referred to one of the six subcommittees of the task force and if an agreement is reached and it nearly always it is we issue a formal statement which is subscribed by all members of the task force

to the news media and circulated among the House members here. Now has it been instrumental in the formulation of any legislation. Specifically we have drafted the bales which have been introduced by members of the task force and members of the Republican leadership in the house. Perhaps the most prominent of the EAS is the so-called Electronic Surveillance Act which was introduced by Mr. McCulloch the ranking Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee and members of the leadership on the Republican side as well as task force members. However in addition to the electronic surveillance bill we have introduced at least a score of other Bales dealing generally with the criminals that cute phase of the problem. Could you elaborate a little bit on some of these bills how or what do they intend to accomplish.

I'm glad to do so I believe. Two of the bales in the package which we have introduced are novel they are intended to adapt the Sherman Act and the other anti-trust laws to the control of the organ the crime problem and those familiar with the situation no organized crime has accumulated. One of the largest financial reservoirs of any organization or institution in the United States. The war crimes warlords have tapped that reservoir to invest in legitimate enterprises. Those investments obviously constitute an unfair trade practices of ours the honest legitimate business man is concerned. Also we have introduced legislation which would make it a violation of the anti-trust statute for organized crime to use

money which what lawfully acquired by our investment in legitimate enterprise. This I say would activate the anti trust laws and it would make it possible for federal investigators to conduct investigations are they not today authorized to conduct. Congressman Paul just on the surface you it seems to me that you're cutting it a little then to to say that organized crime is smiling the Trust Act I'm sure you've had attorneys research this could you give us a little background I suggested I'm not going into it at all because they departed just as already on several occasions had applied the anti-trust laws as they exist today to control organized crime situations I have in mind one case which involve the collection of garbage the syndicate had that used its financial resources and its muscle power to control that situation. And it was possible for the department of justice proceeding under the anti-trust statutes to obtain appropriate injunction.

This may be sufficient in itself today yet the introduction of the RBA will provide a vehicle which will stimulate congressional hearings to determine whether or not it's necessary to broaden this go in depth of the anti-trust law. Other words this is not a new precedent you're setting but rather an extension of an existing process not think that's a more accurate description of the bill. Now how how much infiltration has organized crime manage to this point how big is it. I'm sure you have. I have a good many figures and I'll try not to bore you with those but the president's crime commission assembled that which indicated that the total take of organized crime. Could be as much as 50 billion dollars a year. The total income of illegal gambling enterprises is some 7 billion dollars a year of which perhaps half of that comes from the numbers rackets in metropolitan areas. Other statistics would

you know straight the size of the problem. Are these 9 or that there are some 400000 in the aids in institutions of this nation. That is people is going to cost the taxpayer some one billion dollars to the pain. There is no question but that the total problem is GREAT much greater than the average person understand. Now it's just one senator could do we have a lot of different types of sending kids how is this being run on a national basis. Of course it's possible to get their own viewpoints in any doubt. The bird in the Crime Commission the symbol perhaps the most reliable data. And according to that commission's report the Cosa Nostra is organized in some twenty four units operating primarily in the metropolitan areas of the United States. Those units are families as they're called alternately

control in that area and they are interconnected with their counterparts in other metropolitan areas. The typical family is organized with the boss at the top of the underboss beneath him and beneath the underboss several lieutenant and one of the lieutenants the soldiers. There is a strict stratification of that organizational structure which is deliberate in design and in purpose. Let me explain what I mean by that. The Cosa Nostra depends for its success upon secrecy and the overlord that is the underboss and the lieutenant insulate themselves from the possibility that the soldier will inform upon them simply by remaining anonymous to the soldier. It's very artfully

done and it is difficult under the laws we have on the books today to discover what is in progress. After he discovered to pinpoint the responsibility and after you have pinpointed the responsibility to apprehend the culprits and after the culprits are apprehended to establish in a court of law their line of responsibility upward and the chain of command commanded downward. It is a most ingenious scheme. They use the term pinpoint responsibility. Have any of the government investigators of organized crime to this point been able to find out exactly who are the top man. Oh there is no doubt that records in the control of the Justice Department identified by name and address but other pertinent data.

The principal boss is an under boss of the Cosa Nostra throughout the United States. I recall several years ago the jewels of the Laci revelation before Congress the member of the Cosa Nostra who name names has anything been done to your knowledge to follow up on testifying in his testimony. I don't know that I can be completely responsive to that question but I can add on the supplemental information which probably has relevance. Please do. Over the term of years between 1961 and 1965 the FBI under the guidance and direction of the Department of Justice conducted an elaborate electronic surveillance program in this area. And from that program they have accumulated a large library

of tapes and all the entries in internal communication. In that library can be found the names and addresses of those I mentioned before. It's possible that the library itself can be in some material respects in error but it is also possible that those who have access to it can screen it and interrelate it what other information available which would make it possible to conduct more criminal prosecutions than are now current in the federal judicial system. Would you say the Justice Department is dragging its heels in the prosecution of these cases. I do not make that specific charge. I say simply that the Justice Department is a little bit too much intimidated by the fact that some of this evidence was accumulated by electronic surveillance.

The Justice Department assumed that because it was so accumulated it is tainted evidence and therefore cannot be used in a court of law. Perhaps in the present state of the law this is true and that is why legislation such as our task force has recommended is vitally necessary in this war against crime. And your legislation would legalize the use of electronic eavesdropping devices by law enforcement authorities. I'm glad you added the last clause because it's critical. The truth is that the legislation we have introduced essentially is prohibitory and secondarily only permissive. But I don't mean to say that the legislation protects the right of personal privacy by outlawing the use of any electronic surveillance device by any private citizen. It is permitted to be used only by law enforcement officers only about law enforcement officers investigating specific

crimes named in the bail and those are the crimes against the national security. And those are typical of the organized crime operation. Only after the law enforcement officer has shown probable cause before a court of competent jurisdiction that a crime has been committed or is being committed. And after the court has issued its order the law enforcement officer is obliged to abide by it strictly. If he fails to get the court order or if having gotten a court order he departs from its limitations in any way he is subject not only to severe criminal penalties but to civil sanctions as well. So we have trod in this legislation to draw the fine line between the right of the individual to privacy and the right of society to safety. We believe we've done this.

And those who have endorsed this legislation corroborate our own attitude. In other words the bill would require a court order or similar to an electronic search warrant. That's a very good trade indeed is one I've used often myself and I really believe the proof burden is greater for the court order than to prove burden for the typical search warrant is necessary for the put a law enforcement officer to show probable cause that a crime had been or is being committed. The name the name of the suspect and to a defendant by the telephone with used to be tapped. And to indicate what hours of the day or night and for what period of time the telephone must be tapped and he must show that it is impractical to accumulate that evidence by other means. Congressman party in a statement to you issued some time ago you said that in action on this legislation would cause serious parliamentary problems.

Could you tell me what you meant by that. I'm glad to have the opportunity to explain that the essentials of the legislation we have introduced in the House have already been added by the Senate subcommittee of the judiciary to the legislation passed earlier by the house. That means that when the action is completed on the floor of the Senate the House and the Senate will have to have to go to conference. If the conference committee reports a conference report including the electronic surveillance bill which I confidently expect it will then the cry will be raised on the floor of the house when debate is scheduled on the conference report that the house has never considered the Electronic Surveillance Act. The truth is that the House Committee on the Judiciary subcommittee which has in charge such legislation has completed full hearings on the subject and there is no reason whatever that the bill should not be schedule for action by the

subcommittee and by the full committee. This would bring the bill to the floor before it's possible to be confronted with this parliamentary snarl which will flow from the conference report. Now why do you anticipate such reaction on the House floor. I'm testbed that those who are opposed to our bill will raise this as a point of argument and one of the points of opposition to the to the bill. Well it's difficult to assemble them and that because the attorney general seems to be standing almost alone in the executive establishment in opposition to the bill. Our legislation or the concept of the legislation has been indorsed by the Association of federal investigators which consists of all of the investigators in the federal establishment outside the FBI is going to endorse by the National Association of Attorneys General of the states by the National Association of District Attorneys by the by

every law enforcement official organ organization happened there is no level of government. And most recently it was endorsed by the Judicial Conference of the United States which is chaired by the chief justice of the United States and populated by circuit judges and district judges. So it's hard to say that our legislation has a support not only of both Democrats and Republicans in both the House and the Senate. Not only law enforcement but of the judicial branch of the government as well. Mr. Ramsey Clark's own predecessor and for that matter the two previous preceded him indorse the legislation and the president's Crime Commission in a majority of a board endorsed this concert. This is extremely interesting it would seem then that the

policy of the administration toward This is changed on the level of the Justice Department how can we explain that is there any clue to it. I don't care to speculate about that I simply repeat that the former attorney general of the two who preceded him favored this legislation and the present attorney general opposes it. What has been the attitude of the director of the FBI Mr. Hoover characteristically Mr. Hoover has remained aloof recommended the legislation and I think properly so I don't believe that a man walking by is that sensitive post should involve He was able to directly in the in trying to influence the legislative process during your hearings was any representative of the FBI invited to testify and did they know they were not invited because the committee is aware of the policy which was to say that I suppose the Justice Department was represented.

It was and there were it was a negative test it was a negative testimony. Now you mentioned the support that has come from. Groups throughout the country and you say that the chief justice of the Supreme Court labors such legislation. Now let me be precise about that I said that the judicial conference right recommended the concept and the chief justice of the United States chairs the judicial conference. Well now is there any indication whether he went along with the conference or stood as an impartial chairman of it. I cannot say as to that I have no personal information about what happened in the meeting of the educational conference. Now this this meeting of the judicial conference would would their recommendation would seek to amend a Supreme Court decision based on existing legislation wouldn't know it would not. On the contrary. And the resolution adopted by the conference.

Endorsing the concept of this legislation specifically called Why Are those amendments necessary to accommodate the legislation to the framework recommended in the recent Berger decision of the Supreme Court. So it would not be at odds with the Supreme Court decision I would say be in conformity with it. Well my point was it was to pass legislation which would allow the Supreme Court to accept these types of testimony is not going to allow the trial courts to examine. And it seems to me significant that the judicial Capa's resolution was rendered without solicitation on the part of any person or any committee of the Congress it was a voluntary act and I think that is most important. Now the murder case which you just mentioned is the one that threw the monkey wrench into this whole situation some of our listeners may not be aware of that. Would you outline it for one of the Berger case involved.

The statute of the state of New York which has permitted electronic surveillance under proper court supervision. But the court found that the act was not. In itself on its face carefully drawn and indicated that there might be some violation of the unlawful search and seizure clause of the Constitution. But in the opinion which incidentally was written by Mr Justice Clark was a very thinly veiled invitation to the Congress to act in the Thiele and the legislation which we've introduced has been amended to accommodate those recommendations. Congressman Paul you're of course concerned about organized crime and we've seen rioters criminal acts throughout the past summer do you feel that organized crime in any way is contributing to those occurrences in this country.

It was I think very great issue and I think it's an entirely separate issue and organized crime. It is a problem to every citizen of the United States in a very special way. The street violence which we've experienced in the riots probably has altogether separated and Arjen and purpose and effect on the syndicated crime we call organized crime. And if I may I'd like to elaborate upon the equation between organized crime and the average citizen. You know what's going on. I think most people also tend to think that organized crime involves Al Capone and the bumbling investigators pursuing you know the factor under a bumbling OS which permits them to be successful only if they

show he is they will pay it income taxes. And they think that organized crime is somehow remote indeed pads. But indeed it had a direct impact upon the life of the average citizen. Let me illustrate what I mean by that. If Mr. average citizen is a businessman and he's a victim of organized crime. The arson which is committed by organized crime increases his insurance rates. Fraudulent bankruptcy which is practiced deliberately by organized crime leaves the businessman with bad debts. And then of course organized crime affects the entire free enterprise system because as I indicated earlier these people have accumulated a large reservoir of funds which they used to invest to do to move the enterprise and they're able to choke the legitimate business man and administer the average citizen is a victim of organized crime and he is away

during organized crime has infiltrated labor unions and has succeeded in controlling the labor supply and as damages the individual wage earner boss sweetheart contracts it is involved itself an extortion is the price of labor peace and then of course it's had access to the vast pension funds which have been accumulated by you and Mr average citizen is is a victim of organized crime Peter consumer the housewife doesn't realize it of course but the one cent per loaf increase in her bread last week possibly could have been caused by organized criminal activity. We remember the story in a lot of magazine articles which I dealt with. In theory a detergent that had been foisted upon me in peace told unwonted ANP by the War of the criminal law of the organized crime overlord

who had not only insisted that their product be used when it was repealed proceeded to bomb their stores and kill the managers and the consumers of victim if he depends upon those medicines and I don't mean the traffic in hallucinogens and LSD. I'm talking about the average person who must have medicine to maintain his wellbeing and organized crime has invaded that area and recent Lawrence in a dramatic way. Then if a person is on the poverty payroll he's a victim of war. Let me explain what I mean by that. We spend about 2 billion dollars a year in the poverty war program. Well all together organized crime takes

from the numbers racket about three and a half billion dollars a year. The part of your program will never succeed as long as the numbers racket is giving all 50 percent more money than the taxpayer putting in another example. Project Head Start will cost the federal vary here about 350 million dollars this year. That's almost exactly the amount of money that organized crime takes in the trade in narcotics. Another great example the Small Business Administration out of the poverty war program loans about 50 million dollars a year to businessmen small businessmen who otherwise can't get credit. The loan sharking racket operated by organized crime will extract seven times that much from the poor businessman. The small businessman in metropolitan areas was no doubt about it that the

best way that the federal government can fight poverty in our metropolitan areas is to fight and win the fight against crime. Congressman our time is running short as a final question let me ask you what you foresee in the immediate future in this effort to break the back of organized crime. Are we going to win and if so how quickly. We're going to win if we are successful in forging newer and sharper to rules in the House and Senate to the United States. If we fail to give law enforcement officers these two organized crime is going to continue to expand as it has in the past. Organized crime is the principal component. But you might be interested to know that crime in general over a five year period increased seven times as much as our population increased and it will continue I say to increase. And as law enforcement officers

are given new and sharper tools with which to fight the war. And you foresee the task force as an instrumental means of providing the thruster legislatively. I say that we cannot just bar existed see if we fail to stimulate legislative solutions to the crime problem. Thank you very much. That was United States Representative Richard H. Pot Republican of Virginia chairman of the Republican taskforce on crime. And our guest this week on the again our Washington forum this program was produced for national educational radio by W am you appen American University Radio in Washington D.C. I many our public affairs director Bill Greenwood inviting you to listen again next week for another edition of the U.A.E. our Washington forum a weekly program concerned with the significant

issues before us as a nation. This program was distributed by the national educational radio network.