1 - American Memory

205
They remember the inadequacy and tardiness of Taft-Hartley and
previous congressional response to our plight.
They remember the long history of the determined effort by their
entire congressional delegation to secure a legislative remedy.
The overwhelming majority of the people of Hawaii strongly sup-
port action to safeguard them from the impact of future maritime
and longshore disputes on the west coast—the thousands of messages
which have come from people in all walks of life throughout my State
attest to that.
On behalf of the people of Hawaii, therefore, I ask that this sub-
committee and the full Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce act promptly and favorably on H.R. 7189. To do so will be to
take the right action at the right time—before, not after, another
emergency strikes.
Mr. DixoELU The Chair recognizes Mr. Metcalfe.
Mr. METCALFE. May I also ask unanimous consent to insert in the
record at this point a letter f i-om the Honorable Antonio Won Pat of
Guam, who has asked that this be inserted.
Mr. DiNGELL. That letter will appear in the record at this point.
[Hon. Won Pat's letter follows:]
CONGBEBS OF THE UNITED STATES,
HoDSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C., September 26,1974.
Hon. HARLET O. STAOOBBS,
Chairman, Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, V.8. Souse of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : On June 5, 1973, I was privileged to testify before the
Subcommittee on Transportation and Aeronautics on behalf of H.R. 7189, the
Hawaii and Western Islands Surface Commerce Protection Act of 1973. As a cosponsor
of this measure, I wish to again address the need for this legislation to
become law.
Since the time I testified, the United States territory of Guam has undergone
several hardships which relate to the measure at hand.
As you Icnow, H.R. 7189 has but one goal: to keep the shipping ties between
Guam, Hawaii and other American points in the Pacific open during the often
long and difficult West Coast doclt strilces. During the last major strike in 1971,
Pre.sident Nixon waited more than 100 days before invoking tlie Taft-Hartley
Act. Thus, we in the Pacific, who rely on the mainland for 90 percent of our
foodstuffs and other vital supplies, were virtually cut off from our major resources.
As has been repeatedly stated before the Subcommittee in prior hearings,
no other American area must face this constant threat to its ability to
survive. I doubt whetlier the citizens of Akron, Los Angeles, New York, or Atlanta
w^ould suffer such a fate any better than do their counterparts in Honolulu or
Guam.
Today the need for this legislation is greater than ever before. Since June, 1973,
the cost-of-living for all of us has skyrocketed. Food and other items of daily
living are taking a larger portion of our paychecks with each passing week. For
your fellow Americans in the offshore areas the problem is even more acute. The
majority of our supplies are shipped in and the cost of shipping has kept pace
with the increase in other items.
Adding to the complexity of the problem is the spiraling cost of oil, which
forces shipping costs ever upward and in turn forces the i)eople of Guam to once
again face the prospect nf even higher price.s for anything imported to our Island.
Where this vicious cycle will end, I have no idea. We have attempted to alle-
Tiate the problem by turning our attention to improving local agricultural efforts.
This is a long-range program at best, however, and is in no way certain to produce
sufficient results to insure Guam's self-sufficiency in food production.
To make matters worse. Guam recently suffered a cutback in shipping service
from the West Coast when Pacific Far East Lines announced its intention to