Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955
File 013
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955 - File 013. 1955-09. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 31, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/489/show/432.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1955-09). Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955 - File 013. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/489/show/432

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955 - File 013, 1955-09, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 31, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/489/show/432.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. IV, No. 8, September 1955
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date September 1955
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 4 1955; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States
Item Description
Title File 013
Transcript iked WBRICKER AMENDMENT? FOR Senator Bricker Interviewed on Facts Forum's Reporters' Roundup Senator John W. Bricker, sponsor anel author of the Bricker Constitutional Amendment, was questioned recently on "Reporters' Round- Up" by a panel of well-known and able reporters: Mr. I.. Edgar Prina of the Washington Evening Star; and Jack Doherty of the New York Daily News. Mr. Robert F. Hurleigh, nationwide news commentator and Director of Mutual Broadcasting System's Washington operations, served as moderator. PRIMA: Senator, will you state briefly the aim of the proposed ltrie-k.-r Amendment to the Constitution of the United Slates? Bricker: It's very simple. The first section of the Amendment would prevent any treaty or international agreement from violating any of the terms of the Constitution. Tin second section woulel prevent treaties and international agreements entered into by the President and foreign powers from becoming internal law except through action of the Congress, and if they affected thc rights of the states, through the action by the slate legislatures. The third section would require a roll call vote of the Senate before thc ratification of a treaty submitted by the President. PRIMA: I see. Senator, many of the proponents of the \inendment suy that it would reduce or prevent the abuse of the treaty-making power. Now can you point to any abuse of this power by a President in the last four years, or since you first introduced the Hricker e\mendmenl': Bricker.' They have been very careful not to send any amendments down, within recent months anyway, lhat would violate the principle of the Amendmenl. There was one lasl year—that was the treaty wilh Israel which would have permitted professionals to practice in this country without regard tee alienage, which would have set aside the constitutions of many of the states which require citizenship for doctors and lawyers, and set aside the laws of many more states which have the same requirements in them. For instance, to illustrate, if thai treaty bad also carried a provision to the effect that one who had been admitted lo the I'll.lice of the professions in that country could likewise practice in this country without educational requirements "i examination, that would have sel aside likewise slab' laws ami -late constitutions, ami that was admitted by Dean Criswold of Harvard in bis cross-examination in the hear- ings, PRIMA: I see, Senator, but call you point to one treaty, **ly in the last four years, which in your opinion would not nave been concluded and approved by the Senate if there had been a Bricker Amendment? (Continued on Vnge 12) AGAINST Senator Lehman Expresses His Views Before U. S. Senate Our Constitution has been in effect 165 years, and during that long period it has been amended on onlv thirteen sep- eneili' occasions. In only one instance was a constitutional amendment which had been approved ever repealed. That weis the prohibition amendmenl. which had been enacted in haste and under the pressure of propaganda, and was repealed only after a debate which deeply divided the country and detracted the attention of the public from much more- vital and basic issues of the time. Our Constitution has now worked well for 165 years, and has been an effective document for the protection of the freedoms and liberties of the American people. There have been verv few instances where there has been any occasion for the people or for any states to claim that their rights have been abridged by reason of the treaty-making power of the United Slates. That record is a rather good one. WARNS AGAINST HASTY ACTION So I warn the Senate against hastily approving, on an emotional basis, anything so fundamental as an amendment lo thc Constitution of lhe- United Stales. Once approved and ratified, should it later develop to have been an unwise undertaking, it woulel be a difficult thing to undo. Let us consider carefully and soberly what it is proposed thai we do. I hope we do not do it; in fact. I am very confident we will not do it. I am convinced that lhe supremacy of the Constitution over treaties ami executive agreements, if necessary to be reaffirmed at all. and their relationship to internal law. should be reaffirmed and clarified at this time by joint resolution, rather than bv amending the Constitution. If there were, in fact, any substantial question as to the supremacy of the Constitution, a constitutional amendment would be not only appropriate but imperative. But in a situation like the one actually before us, where there is no sound ground for doubting thc supremacy of the Constitution, an amendment of the Constitution would create more confusion and uncertainty than it could conceivably remove. In actual practice, we know from our recent experience lhat the Congress has not been indifferent to the consequences of Supreme Court decisions. Within the past decade the effects of Supreme Court decisions have been remedied e.n eit least four occasions. Congress provided for state regulation of the insurance business, after the Supreme Courl had held it subject to the federal antitrust laws: lhe claims for portal-to-portal pay were extinguished by act of Congress (Continue,! on Pime It,, r, 1955 PACTS FORUM NEWS, September, 1955 Page 11
File Name uhlib_1352973_v004_n008_013.jpg