Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955
File 007
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 007. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 29, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/6.

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. 9, October 1955 - File 007. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/6

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. 9, October 1955 - File 007, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 29, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/6.

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. 9, October 1955
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. IV, No. 9, October 1955
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date unknown
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 007
Transcript Reprinted from Mill YORK TIMES, Tuesday, August 9,1955 PENTAGON AND HOOVER By Hanson W. Baldwin A special defense department task force has been established to study the 100 major recommendations and dozens of minor changes regarding the armed forces that were suggested by lhe Hoover Commission. Various study groups or task forces of the Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government made these recommendations about the Defense Department and the services. They covered the fields of organization and policy. The Commission, headed by former President Herbert Hoover, endorsed most of the task force findings—some of a very sweeping nature. Charles A. Coolidge, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, heads the Pentagon group lhat is studying all of the Hoover suggestions. The group is expelled to formulate a Pentagon "position," approving, disapproving or modifying the Hoover recommendations. It is expected that bills covering some of the points will be ready for presentation to tbe next session of Congress in January. The Coolidge study is of fundamental importance to the armed forces. Many with of the- Hoover Commission recommenda tions were so sweeping in nature that service people fear their effects upon morale and combat effectiveness. Medical care for dependents, travel regulations, the operation of commis- sen i.'s and post exchanges would all be influenced — from the service man's point of view, adversely—by the Commission reports. EFFECTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations also would tend • •> centralize even more authorilv in civilian management at the Secretary "f Defense level, and woulel reduce lhe authority of military personnel, even in command fields. Among the extensive and. in some **ays, revolutionary recommendations advanced we're more predominant civilian managemenl of military transportation, civilian responsibility for military fiscal matters, civilian supervision for military legal matters and the suggested establishment of a "civilian-managed" agency ... to administer common supplv and service activities." Thc Hoover recommendations regard- tng the Pentagon, wilh some notable '"nl outstanding exceptions, approached 'ne problem of military policy and Organization primarily from Ihe point of view of dollar economy. The tenor of too many reports had the effect of under-emphasizing the reason for the existence- eif lhe armed services—combat effectiveness. There were at least two notable exceptions to these strictures. The reports on research and development and on intelligence activities were among others lhal did not overemphasize the "dollar economy" approach, and their recommendations thus were more valuable and more convincing. A MAJOR JOB IN PROSPECT The new Pentagon evaluation task Force has. therefore, a major job of sifting and analyzing recommendations, some of which arc constructive, some of which could he destructive. In making this analysis, it should reject two commonly accepted "principles." When applied lo lhe Pentagon and the armed forces they have caused much of the confusion and red tape and difficulty wilh which thc formulation of even the simplesl military plans is now associated. One of these shibboleths is that the armed services can be run like any business. The other is that any businessman can move into the Pentagon and quickly master, better than the professional, the intricacies of weapons sys- tems, tactics, military personnel and morale and so on. "I have heard it said, time and again," writes N. Henry Josephs, a New York attorney who has experience with the armed forces, "that the business nf National Defense is the same as anv other business. Men of big business argue, therefore, lhal there is no reason whv general rules of good business iiiein- agemenl should not apply equally to the armed services. This falsi' premise is responsible for lhe unrealistic approach lo llu' problem by (some) of the Hoover task feiiecs. "Certain areas of waste in Ihe armed services could and should be reduced, lull in a manner which would not interfere with essential military patterns, or in anv manner that would slow up, or interfere with, mobility of military com- mand. ANOTHER LETTER CITED Another Idler points out that "the invasion of civil administrators into what are clearly military functions is eun' cause "f the confusion lhat plagues the lop level military direction and command of our armed forces." The letter also says in part: "No experienced Inited States mililarv officer questions the concept of civil superiority in policy-making and supervision . . . But the trend over the past decade has gone so far thai wc find unthinking acceptance of the idea thai anv successful business administrator or financial executive is by reason of his appointment competent to decide such things as weapon types, military organization, disciplinary matters, or solve the vastly complicated problems of military logistics. "Too many of our military decisions in these and other areas are based on a newly appointed civilian's quick field trip, an oversimplified graphic presentation and a few hastily jotled memos prepared by a special assistant. "In the not so distant past a civilian Secretary acquired some knowledge and considerable experience in the policy direction of an armed service simply by staying in office for a while . . . The rapid turnover today in the floating population of transient Secretaries and a corps of special assistants plays havoc with sound and authoritative mililarv command." "One far-reaching and adverse effect of this type of control," the letter continues, "is the drafting of legislation affecting our armed forces by civilian legal assistants whose closest approach to seafaring is attending a revival of 'Pinafore.' or whose military experience is documented by a reference in 'From Here to Fternity.' " Objectives Of Hoover Commission ". . . In our recommendations we have sough! six objective*: l-irst—To preserve the full security of the nation in a disturbed world. Second—To in a i o t a i n the functioning of all necessary agencies which make for the eomnion welfare. Third—To stimulate the fundament :i I research upon which national security and programs are based* Fourth—To improve efficiency and eliminate waste in the executive agencies. Fifth—To eliminate or reduce government competition with private enterprise. Sixth—and perhaps the most important of all — Io strengthen the economic, social and govern ment a I structure which has brought us, now for one hundred sixty-six years, constant blessings and progress. —The Hoover Commission." FACTS FORUM NEWS, October, 1955 Page 5
File Name uhlib_1352973_v004_n009_007.jpg