---

Press Conference February 15, 1961

THE PRESIDENT.  I have several statements to make first, and then I will be glad to submit to questions.

[1.] Ambassador Stevenson in the Security Council today has expressed fully and dearly the attitude of the United States Government towards the attempts to undermine the effectiveness of the United Nations organization.  The United States can take care of itself, but the United Nations system exists so that every nation can have the assurance of security.  Any attempt to destroy this system is a blow aimed directly at the independence and security of every nation, large and small.

I am also, however, seriously concerned at what appears to be a threat of unilateral intervention in the internal affairs of the Republic of Congo.  I find it difficult to believe that any government is really planning to take so dangerous and irresponsible a step.  Nevertheless, I feel it important that there should be no misunderstanding of the position of the United States in such an eventuality.

The United States has supported and will continue to support the United Nations presence in the Congo.  The United States considers that the only legal authority entitled to speak for the Congo as a whole is a government established under the Chief of State, President Kasavubu, who has been seated -in the General Assembly of the United Nations by a majority vote of its members.  The broadening of the government under President Kasavubu is a quite legitimate subject of discussion, and such discussions have been going on in Leopoldville and in New York.  But the purported recognition of Congolese factions as so-called governments in other parts of that divided country can only Confuse and make more difficult the task of securing Congolese independence and unity.

The United Nations offers the best, if not the only possibility for the restoration of conditions of stability and order in the Congo.

The press reports this afternoon that Prime Minister Nehru has stated, and I quote, "If the United Nations goes out of the Congo, It will be a disaster." I strongly agree with this view.  Only by the presence of the United Nations in the Congo can peace be kept in Africa.

I would conceive it to be the duty of the United States and, indeed, all members of the United Nations to defend the Charter of the United Nations by opposing any attempt by any government to intervene unilaterally in the Congo.

[2.] Secondly, I have a statement that we have today recognized the Government of El Salvador.  It has announced its determination to bring about free and democratic elections in that country, and it seeks solutions for the economic and social difficulties, which that country has faced.  These objectives are in consonance, with our goal of a free and prosperous Latin America.  Manifestos of the government and its agencies have indicated a clear determination to improve the standard of living of the people of that country, particularly those engaged in agriculture.  We hope to be able to assist El Salvador in reaching these goals under the spirit of the act of Bogota.

(3-) Thirdly, this country is most concerned about the very serious problem of unemployment which we have faced this winter and the more than five and a half million Americans who want to work and can't find a job.

We are particularly concerned about the more than 600,000 Americans who have exhausted their unemployment compensation checks and who are now on relief.  We have sent to the Congress a program, which we believe would be of assistance to the country and to them this winter.  We   do, as you know, provide for an extension of unemployment compensation benefits for those who have exhausted their benefits.  We provide aid to unemployed workers.  Today under the law a child of a worker who is out of work can only receive necessary assistance if his family splits up.  We would correct that situation.

We sent a program up for aid to distressed areas.

We have sent up legislation improving the minimum wage.

We have sent up legislation to the Hill, which will provide for an increase in social security benefits, and it will be followed by other programs as time goes on.

We have also provided for Executive action increasing the amount of food available in those areas of talc United States where people live on these food packages.

I hope that we can get action on these programs as soon as possible.  Today the Ways and Means Committee of the House held hearings on our program to extend unemployment compensation benefits.  I am hopeful that we can move forward this winter so that some relief can be given to our fellow Americans.

In order to provide a stimulus to our economy I have provided, with the cooperation of the departments of the Government, for a speedup in programs using funds now available.  Over $250 million, as we have said, will be distributed immediately under the GI dividend program.  There are $4 billion for tax refunds, which are coming due.  As soon as those who are available for these refunds can put their applications in, we will attempt to stimulate and improve and quicken distribution of these funds.

We provided under the instructions given through the State of the Union Address for $700 million, committed this month for additional Polaris submarines and airlift capacity.  In addition, we are providing through the Post Office a speedup in the programs to build post offices, which had been authorized and approved by the Congress previously; but these programs would be developed in a more concentrated period than they would otherwise have been.

For farmers we have provided $75 million additional for loans to speed spring planting costs and also for farm home loans.

For the Federal highway construction program we are going to make $734 million to be available to the States this month.  This program of course calls for action by the States and the local bodies.  And we are sending, tonight, telegrams to all the State Governors asking if they also can provide for speedup in their programs.

I want to make it clear that we are going to continue to work in cooperation with the Governors and with the Congress, all agencies of the Government, because we want to see the American economy get back on its feet.  We want to see these people working again.

In addition, the Small Business Administration plans to increase by 25 percent the criteria for what small businesses there are that are eligible for defense contracts.  By increasing this criteria we will make other small businesses eligible who happen to be in areas where there is high unemployment.

I am hopeful that these programs will all be of assistance.  Mr. Goldberg's tour showed that in States like Michigan, nearly 350,000 people are out of work; 12 percent of the people in Gary, Ind. over 200,000 steel workers; and they need our help.

I will be glad to answer any questions.

[4-] Q. Mr. President, regarding the situation in the Congo and the crisis precipitated there by the Soviet Union, could you evaluate the impact on Soviet-American relations and your hopes that they might be improving?

THE PRESIDENT.  This statement was carefully drawn and represents the policy of the United States at this time on these matters, and I am going to confine myself, in all questions on the Congo, to the statement that we have made.  I think this is the most effective way to deal with it.

Q. Mr. President, in a related field, however, Mr. Khrushchev this afternoon, I think in a message replying to you, said that he Welcomed your proposal that you voiced in the State of the Union Message for pooling American-Soviet efforts in space exploration projects.  Do you think this sort of pooling and cooperation you envisioned in your State of the Union Message will still be possible under the tense conditions that developed in the UN. today?

THE PRESIDENT.  I hope it will be possible for the relations between the United States and the Soviet Union to develop in such a way that the peace can be protected and that it will be possible for us to use our energies along peaceful and productive and fruitful lines.

The development of space, preventing outer space from being used as a new area of war, of course, is of the greatest possible concern to the people of this country.  I am hopeful that it will be possible, if relations between our two countries can be maintained, can be channeled along peaceful lines; I am hopeful that real progress can be made this year.  But it is my earnest hope that our relations can remain harmonious and that it will be possible for us to cooperate in peaceful ventures rather than be differing on matters, which carry with them such hazards.

[5.] Q. Along this line, sir, could you tell us how you would feel about a meeting at some time in the next few weeks or months with Mr. Khrushchev? Do you think it would be helpful or if it should be delayed?

THE PRESIDENT.  There are no plans nor have there been any plans for any meeting with Mr. Khrushchev.  As I said earlier, I have not heard whether Mr. Khrushchev is planning to come to the United Nations meeting.     There are no other plans for a meeting at this time.

Q. If he did come, sir, would you welcome a visit of Mr. Khrushchev to Washington?

THE PRESIDENT.  I would make a 'judgment as to what could usefully be done once we knew what Mr. Khrushchev's plans were and what-we would make a judgment as to what actions we would take.  But I must say I have not heard that.  Khrushchev is planning to come to the United Nations at this time.

[6.] Q. Mr. President, you addressed a conference of businessmen here-c early this week and one of the officials of that conference noticed afterwards with some satisfaction that you hadn't used the word recession.  He said he thought this was a good thing because iii fact there was no business recession. Was your omission because you agreed with him or how do you feel about the word and about the economic situation?

THE PRESIDENT.  As you know, if you are unemployed and out of a job you think there is a recession.  If you arc working, perhaps the impact of the economic slowdown doesn't hit you quite as hard.  I think we have been in a recession for some months and that we have not recovered fully from the recession of '58, which is a matter, of course, of great concern.

We are concerned because while there was an economic slowdown in '49, and '54, and '58, we now have an economic slowdown only 2 years after the '58 recession.  So this compounds our difficulties.  I think that- well, to-to put it precisely to things, then I would call this a recession.

[7.] Q. In line, sir, with your statement a moment ago that you hoped that the relations between United States and Russia would improve, Adm.  Arleigh Burke is quoted in some newspapers today in an interview in which he makes some rather sharp comments on American and Russian relations and among other things says that the United States Navy would sail into the Black Sea if it so chose.  I am asking, sir, is this in line with your administration policy that all high officials should speak with one voice?

THE PRESIDENT--.  I have been informed-- perhaps Mr. Salinger can correct me that that interview was given on January I2, which was before the administration took over January 20 and before we gave any indication that we would like all statements dealing with national security to be coordinated.  I would (I say that this makes me happier than- ever that such a directive has gone out. [Laughter]

(8.) Q. Mr., President, I would like to change the scene here to Cuba, if I may, for a moment-.  A member of Congress has raised the issue of possible conflict in our trade policy towards Cuba.  He points out that under President Eisenhower's order all exports from this country to Cuba were barred.  On the other hand, we are now importing considerable quantities of Cuban goods.  Specifically this member of Congress pointed out one liquor company has purchased $12 million of Cuban molasses.  Also we are importing considerable quantities of Cuban fruit and vegetables.  Have you done anything about it or are you looking into this matter or contemplate doing anything about it?

THE PRESIDENT.  The molasses has not been purchased as yet. It was intended, as I understand, to be purchased during the next month, and that is a private transaction.  There are seventy, I think, or eighty million dollars worth of fruit, tobacco, and so on which are coming in, mostly to Florida.  We are now making a study of what would be the most beneficial action we could take in regard to that.

On the molasses there is some question as to under what conditions we could intervene in that transaction, but, of course, it has been my hope that that transaction would not be consummated.  I am not convinced that we are totally without resources and we are considering what we could take to consider that particular transaction.  Twelve million dollars, I believe, is supposed to be made into gin-and I am not sure that that is in the public interest.

 [Laughter] [9.] Q. Sir, on the space probe towards Venus made by the Soviets recently, do you think this would point up any space gap between our two countries, and do you see there is any need for a speedup in our efforts in that field?

THE PRESIDENT.  The Soviet Union, as I said in the State of the Union, of course, is raised the issue of possible conflict in our trade policy towards Cuba.  He points out that under President Eisenhower's order all exports from this country to Cuba were barred.  On the other hand, we are now importing considerable quantities of Cuban goods.  Specifically this member of Congress pointed out one liquor company has purchased $i2 million of Cuban molasses.  Also we are importing considerable quantities of Cuban fruit and vegetables.  Have you done anything about it or are you looking into this matter or contemplate doing anything about it?

THE PRESIDENT.  The molasses has not been purchased as yet. It was intended, as I understand, to be purchased during the next month, and that is a private transaction.  There are seventy, I think, or eighty million dollars worth of fruit, tobacco, and so on which are coming in, mostly to Florida.  We are now making a study of what would be the most beneficial action we could take in regard to that.

On the molasses there is some question as to under what conditions we could intervene in that transaction, but, of course, it has been my hope that that transaction would not be consummated.  I am not convinced that we are totally without resources and we are considering what we could take 'to consider that particular transaction.  Twelve million dollars, I believe, is supposed to be made into gin-and I am not sure that that is in the public interest. [Laughter]

[9.] Q. Sir, on the space probe towards Venus made by the Soviets recently, do you think this would point up any space gap between our two countries, and do you see there is any need for a speedup in our efforts in that field?

THE PRESIDENT.  The Soviet Union, as I said in the State of the Union, of course, is ahead of us in boosters and there is an indication they are going to be ahead of us for some time to come.  This was, as I said in my statement at the time, this is a scientific achievement that is an impressive one.  We have made exceptional gains in space technology, which may not be as dramatic as Sputnik or as a probe to Venus but which in the long run does, at least I think should, give all Americans satisfaction in the efforts that we have made.

Boosters, however, we are behind on and it is a matter of great concern.  The Soviet Union made significant breakthrough in this area some years ago.  They have continued to maintain their lead, and it explains why they were ahead of us in Sputnik and it explains why they have been able to put larger objects into space.  We have to recognize their chances of continuing to do that unless we are able to make a breakthrough before the Saturn booster comes into operation.  Unless we are able to make a scientific breakthrough we have to recognize that we are in a position-secondary position on boosters.  It is a matter of great concern.  We have sufficiently large boosters to protect us militarily, but for the long, heavy exploration into space, which requires large boosters, the Soviet Union has been ahead and it is going to be a major task to surpass them.

(10.) Q. Mr. President, this is a question on the sound dollar.  A relative of yours, a Republican relative, Mr. Bayard Auchincloss of Oklahoma City, has started a one-man campaign to regain-to restore the sound dollar.  He has said that the public needs to be inspired by some forceful leadership in Washington to lead them in one major phase-and that is: fighting Government waste.  Sir, do you propose to spark such leadership from the White House, or do you have other means in mind by which the public can assist you in regaining the sound dollar?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, I don't want to deny kinship.  But I-to the best of my knowledge, he is not related to me.

Q. Your step-second cousin. [Laughter] THE PRESIDENT.  Well, then he is related to me.  But we have not met; I have not heard from him directly.  We want to-as a matter of fact, several members of the Congress-I was Chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Reorganization which attempted to put through some of the Hoover Commission recommendations are going to continue to work with a smaller staff beginning, of course, from the White House.  And I am hopeful that all members of this Government will not consider now that they have been placed in position of responsibility that the test of their good work is the size of their staff.  We are going to continue to try and will seek the cooperation of every citizen of this country in making sure that we get value for every dollar that the Government spends.

The Government spends a great deal of money.  In fact, I asked, yesterday, Mr. Bell to talk to Senator Douglas and Congressman Hebert, who conducted hearings on waste in the Pentagon and have suggested it might be possible to save more than $1 billion, to meet with them.  And we are going to continue to meet with every citizen, whether he is my relative or not-I would be glad to hear from Mr. Auchincloss.  It is an important problem.  When the Government spends over $8o billion we know we can do a better job in spending that money more wisely.  And I would be delighted and I welcome the view of Mr. Auchincloss or any other citizen and all members of this administration to try to maintain a balance between revenue and expenditures.

[11.] Q. Mr. President, in regard to your program to distribute surplus foods to needy people in other countries, 2 weeks ago Dr. Fry, who is head of the World Council of Churches, advocated that this be done through Government channels and not through church or other private agencies.  He said that the private agencies just can't insure that the food is going to reach the most needy, which our Government regulations require.  Has your administration formulated a policy on this, or do you have a comment on it?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, of course some does go through the governments and then we have relied upon private agencies.  I would be very reluctant to abandon private agencies because they have done a first-class job in assisting us to get this food out.

I would be glad to see his comments and see what his suggestions would be.  The alternative, of course, would be for us to distribute through the government involved, and we have never felt that that was better than having it done through voluntary groups.  But Mr. McGovern is now in Latin America and he is looking at what we can do in that area, in food for peace, and I am sure that he will come back with some proposals on how we can make this distribution more effective.

Q. May I just say, excuse me, sir, Dr. Fry does not suggest clothing and so forth-he still wants that which is contributed voluntarily to be distributed through the church.  But just our Government surplus food.

THE PRESIDENT.  We will look into that.

(12.) Q. Mr. President, have you determined whether any employee of our State Department was responsible or had any part in advancing the Communist foothold in Cuba, and if so, sir, will you take steps to remove them from office?

THE PRESIDENT.  I think  that  probably  miscalculations were made by our country in assessing in Cuba, but I have no evidence that anyone did it out of any other motive but to serve the United States.

(13.) Q. Mr. President, to clarify an earlier answer you made, is it your view that we can proceed in serious negotiations with the Soviet Union in such areas as arms control and nuclear test ban while they continue to agitate the situation in the United Nations and in the Congo? In other words, can we conduct relations with them in compartments?

THE PRESIDENT.  I am hopeful that all countries that are members of the United Nations will ' make a determination to operate in the Congo through the United Nations.  I think that that is essential.  As I said in my statement, unilateral intervention by one country or a group of countries outside of the United Nations, would endanger the United Nations and endanger peace in Africa.  I am hopeful that that will come to be the judgment of all members of the United Nations.  And if it does, I think that we will find ourselves with the prospects of peace increased.   

(14-) Q. Following up Mr. Kent's question, Mr. President, the Republican Party as a whole seems to also take the view that your administration has overstated the economic recession.  I wonder, sir, if you have given any thought to conferring with the Republican leaders in Congress in hopes of getting their support for your program to solve the economic recession, and if you have made available 'labile to them all the information that your administration has on the economic situation?

THE PRESIDENT.  To answer your second part, we have made available all the information that we have.  I have described it.  Everyone can look at these figures and come to the conclusion that-their own conclusion-. I see no necessity or desirability of minimizing our problems.  I think only by facing the problems with precision is it possible to get action.

I want the cooperation of the leadership on both sides and will make every effort that I can to seek the support of Members of the House and Senate on both sides of the aisle.  But anyone who looks at the million cars in inventory today, who looks at the figures on unemployment, who looks at the steel capacity operating at about 50 percent of capacity-who looks at the 600,000 Americans who have exhausted their unemployment compensation, who looks at five and a half million Americans who are out of work, who looks at our decline in economic growth since last spring, I would say would come to the same conclusion that I have: that it is necessary for us to take action.

The fact that a judgment was made the last year about what 1960 would be-1960 was not the most prosperous year in our history as had been estimated earlier.  We are now-find ourselves obliged to take action this winter.  And by calling it a recession or calling it-saying it is not a recession, calling it a plateau-that's no excuse for not taking action.  In my opinion it is essential that we move forward this winter because we don't want to find ourselves in the winter and the spring and the summer debating about our problem of whether we are in an economic recession or whether we have an economic decline and finding at the end of the congressional session that no action has been taken, only that all of my statements have had impact, I believe, of a snowflake in the Potomac, which was the description used by a distinguished Member of the Congress.  I hope they have more effect than that.

(15.) Q.  Mr.  President,  your  task  force on distressed areas considers an independent agency with an administrator directly responsible 'be to you the most efficient way of coping with this urgent problem.  They are fearful that it might get fragmented if it were made a bureau in the Commerce Department.  Do you have any objection to the creation of an independent agency under your authority?

THE PRESIDENT.  I believe that it would be most advantageous to have it in the Department of Commerce with all of the resources of the Department of Commerce to supplement its work.  That would be my first choice.  If the Congress makes a different judgment, however, I would accept that and say that an independent agency would be useful.  But I do think that with Governor Hodges, who is committed to the program, with a Cabinet officer to represent their views at Cabinet meetings, and with the broad range of responsibilities which the Department of Commerce has, that this is the best place to put it.  But this is a matter on which I would certainly listen to the Congress if they came to a different conclusion.

(16.) Q. Mr. President, if other nations become reluctant to assign troops to the UN. for police work in the Congo, would you tell us whether we would consider contributing American units?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, we are now hopeful that the policy which the Secretary General has followed, of securing troops for the Congo from Africa and Asia-we are hopeful that that is going to be successful.  And until that fails-I don't think we should go under any assumption that he is going to fall, and if he does fall then we will have to make a new judgment.  But I am hopeful that those countries which are most involved with maintaining the security and independence of the African countries and peace in Africa, that they will continue to respond to the Secretary General's appeal for support.  And that is also true, of course, of Asian nations who are also concerned, particularly the smaller countries.  We hope that they can maintain control of troop movements and not begin to have troops from larger countries with all of the hazards that that might bring.

Q. Mr. President, in view of your remarks about the Congo and other world problems, do you regard the future developments in the Congo as a kind of good faith test for the prospect of improving the international atmosphere as a whole?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, of course, if we fail-if the United Nations fails in the Congo, if we who are members of the United Nations fail, then of course the future usefulness of the United Nations will be impaired.  And I think that this would be particularly serious for smaller countries.

As I said in my statement, the United States is not a small country.  We can defend ourselves.  Countries which I think must rely particularly upon the United Nations are smaller countries.  'Me smallest country in the United Nations has the same vote in the General Assembly as the Soviet Union and the United States.  And therefore I would think that they would be reluctant to see the United Nations fragmented, to see its usefulness impaired, to see the authority of the Secretary General, who represents all the members of the United Nations, to see it lessened.  So I regard this as a most important test of the future effectiveness of the United Nations.

Q. Mr. President, do you find that the United States as a great power, as you have described, with legitimate interests all around the world, is sometimes hampered in the pursuit of these national interests by its membership in the United Nations? Could you conceive of a situation perhaps in Latin America where we would be hampered in a place where we had a vital interest by United Nations action?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, I suppose it is possible always to conceive of situations, but I will say that the United Nations action in for example, the fact that they maintained troops in the Gaza Strip for a number of years, I think, has been helpful in maintaining peace in that area.  And the Congo has been an extremely difficult assignment and responsibility for the United Nations.  But at least we have not had as yet massive unilateral intervention by great powers with all of the risks of war that that might bring, and with all the dangers to the peace that that might bring, because of the way the United Nations has met its responsibilities.  So, I am a strong believer in the United Nations and while it is possible to say that they might interfere with some legitimate interest of ours in the future, I am prepared to say that their actions in the past, at present, and I believe in the future represent the legitimate common interest of all members of the United Nations.

Reporter: Thank you, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT. Thank you.

NOTE: President Kennedy's fourth news conference, broadcast over radio and television, was held in the State Department Auditorium at 7 o'clock on Wednesday evening, February 15, 1961.

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, I think we have talented people in our Washington group who are giving it a great deal of time and attention.  And therefore I am hopeful-though we have been in office only few weeks-I am hopeful that before the snow is off the ground that we will have been able to stimulate action in a variety of areas.

[.21.] Q. Mr. President, in your State of the Union Address, you remarked that morality in private business has not been sufficiently spurred by morality in public business.  In the light of the economy-sized malpractice revealed by--carried on by some of the American leading corporations, would you care to comment on this situation and the impact of such private business morality or immorality on the community itself?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, having participated in the investigation of improper practices in the labor-management field for 2 or 3 years, and having had a good deal of public attention given to it, I am hopeful that the Department of Justice, the Antitrust Division which was very effectively led in recent months, and other agencies of the Government will concern-and the Congress will concern itself about the problem of conflicts of interest and monopolistic practices, as well as even more illicit practices conducted in the American business community.  And I hope that the business community itself will consider what steps it could take in order to lift this shadow from its shoulders.

Q. Do you feel, sir, that perhaps business might well establish codes of ethical practice such as the trade unions have established?

THE PRESIDENT.  yes.  I am hopeful that the unions will live up to these ethical practices which state a very high standard for them; and I think it would be very beneficial if business groups today would consider what they could do to protect themselves from charges of conflicts of interest of the kind that we have recently seen, and also of the effort made by these large electrical companies to defraud the Government.  And I must say I would be interested to watch what progress they can make in that area.

[.22.) Q.  Mr. President, Admiral Burke's speech was originally checked out and cleared of certain things which I believe Mr. Salinger said might have been sources of unnecessary friction with the Soviet Union.  Some Republicans in Congress charged that this was appeasement.  Could you sketch in for us the rather difficult ground between appeasement and "unnecessary friction"?

THE PRESIDENT.  No. All I would say is that I would hope that those who make speeches in the area of national security, Chiefs of Staff and others, and all others, would attempt to have those speeches coordinated with the Department of State and with the White House, so that we can make sure that those speeches represent national policy.  I must say it seems to me that Theodore Roosevelt set a very good standard for us all, and one which I hope this administration will follow by speaking softly and maintaining.

[23.] Q. Mr. President, on Monday Mr. Rusk said that the United States was prepared to take cooperative action with the other American Republics to end tyranny, he said, against either the left or the right.  Is it contemplated that we shall ask the other American States to join with us in some steps on the Cuban problem?

THE PRESIDENT.  The Cuban problem and the problem of tyranny throughout all of Latin America is a matter which is of course of special concern to Mr. Berle and his group-interdepartmental group-and they have not concluded their analysis as yet.

[24.] Q. Mr. President, Castro is reported to have built a new radio station, one of the largest in the hemisphere, which will begin operations within a few months to broadcast pro-Castro propaganda throughout Latin America.  Is there anything we can do or plan to do to counter this?

THE PRESIDENT. We are giving the matter of Cuba and its export of its revolution throughout Latin America a matter of high priority.  I could not state what actions will be taken yet until Mr. Berle, Mr. Mann, and Mr. Rusk have concluded their deliberations, which are now going ahead very intensively.

[25.] Q. Mr. President,-one of your task forces recommended that you be given discretionary power within limits to cut tax rates as a counter-cyclical device.  Can you tell us what you think of this idea?

THE PRESIDENT. Well, in 1958 there were two proposals to cut taxes.   One was made in March and I believe the other was made in June.  I voted against it in March and voted for it in June, because it seemed to be, according to the economists I talked to, to be helpful.  As you remember, I don't think it got more than 23 or 24 votes.  The recession was serious and we ended up with a $12 billion deficit.  Now we are going to take another look at the economy in April and make a judgment at that time whether we can expect an upturn in the spring or in the summer.

I will say that I am not convinced at the present time that Congress would entertain that proposal, and I would not make it at the present time because I do think we should have more experience and more perspective on the state of the economy before making a proposal which is quite far-reaching, and which would cost the Federal budget perhaps $4 or $5 billion, which is a serious matter and which would limit, perhaps, our ability to go ahead with other programs which in the long run may be more useful.  If you have a tax cut, it may last 6 months, if the Congress should grant it, and you lose $5 billion, which is put back into the economy and expended.  With $5 billion or $3 billion devoted to education or health or international security, you can produce a longer range result.  So that this is a matter which must be considered from various perspectives.  In any case, in April we will ' try to make another judgment on the state of the economy.  What I am concerned about is that the economy will move along, using less than capacity, and it is extremely difficult to take steps which will provide ' quickly for it to operate at full capacity.

What we are concerned about is that with the tremendous increase in automation that it's possible for business profits to remain substantial and yet for employment to lag.  The fact that the steel companies were able to maintain rather substantial profits at a time when they are operating at less than 50 percent of capacity does indicate the kind of problem we face with a good many more than 100,000 steel workers out of work.

In answer to your question specifically, we will come back to what further steps could be taken in April, but I do hope that the Congress will act on the proposals we have now made, which involve most especially the unemployment compensation payments and also the distressed area payments, as well as some improvements in social security.  If we could move ahead on those we could get a better idea of perhaps what action should be taken in April.

[26.] Q. Mr. President, the fighting in Laos is continuing.  The Soviet airlift is now 2 months old.  The Soviet answer to the proposal to revive the International Control Commission has been delayed for some weeks.  I wonder if you can tell us how long this Government is prepared to wait before it proposes some new action to resolve this continuing crisis.

THE PRESIDENT. There will be a meeting at the White House this afternoon on the subject of Laos and what new action we should now take.  And I am hopeful that some proposal will be forthcoming from that meeting.

[27.] Q. Mr. President, many States are now re-forming their congressional districts as a result of the 1960 census and inevitably this leads to charges of gerrymandering directed at both parties.     Can you tell us where you stand on Chairman Celler's bill to control gerrymandering to a certain extent by such devices as making districts be contiguous and control a certain population within a State?

THE PRESIDENT. Well, even if you could pass those proposals you could still have a good deal of gerrymandering.  I represented a district which was about 5 to 1 Democratic, which was contiguous, which was geographically associated with an adjoining district, which was marginally Republican.  Now it is very difficult for the Congress or for the Federal Government to enforce standards.  What should have happened, of course, is probably under some standards is those two districts cut in a different way which would have provided instead of one Republican Congressman with a very marginal majority, while the Democratic Congressman got to 5 to 1, it probably would have ended up with two Democratic Congressmen, which may or may not have been in the public interest.    [ Laughter.]

But I do think it is very difficult for us to try to draw these lines.  There isn't any doubt that they are unsatisfactorily drawn, not only for the Congress, which is not the worst offender, but the State legislatures, where we have very-and have had for many years-notorious examples of gerrymandering, but which is a responsibility for the States, not the Federal Government.

In any case, I am not familiar wholly with Congressman Celler's proposal and exactly what his standards will be, but I will look at it.

Q. Mr. President, in that same connection, could you tell us where you stand or do you have a position on increasing the size of the House of Representatives?

THE PRESIDENT.  Well, it is 435 Members now, which is a large body.  Congressman Chelf and I believe other Congressmen have proposed increasing it, I think to 450- 1 will discuss that matter with Speaker Rayburn and get his views as well as the leadership of the House on both sides.

Reporter: Thank you, Mr. President.

NOTE: President Kennedy's third news conference was held in the State Department Auditorium at 10 o'clock on Wednesday morning, February 8, 1961.