Mr. McDONALD. I think that is a very good point. Senator Birch Bayh made the point earlier-and I was very pleased to have been here when the distinguished Senator made his presentation-that there is perhaps a segment of American society that may feel disadvantaged, for whatever reason, wrongly or not, may feel they have not been brought into the mainstream, and that perhaps in recognizing Columbus, or George Washington, it would be wise since that is a major segment of our society, to recognize a Negro American or a black American. By their statements, by their writings, by their actions, by their life what they were able to represent, I think perhaps three black Americans could quickly come to mind.

One would be George Washington Carver; the second would be Booker T. Washington, and I think the man would be shocked at the thought if he were here today-if he could be here today, he would certainly argue against it, but a man who pointed out that he could come from poverty in Florida, whose mother, I believe, ran a school so that he could gain some of the better things in life. A family who, as Senator Bayh stated, clawed and worked its way up from poverty, from a poor background, was Gen. Chappy James. Chappy James, as you know, as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, passed away perhaps a year ago. I do not think we have had a more dedicated, finer American on the scene than Gen. Chappy James. I think he would be a true idol.

Senator THURMOND. He was a four-star general; was he not?

Mr. McDONALD. You, as a member of the Armed Services Committee of the Senate, know well that Gen. Chappy James was a fourstar general in the Air Force. He fought with distinguished accommodations in World War II, the Korean war, and the Vietnam war for a period. This man was truly a giant of an American in so many ways, in every way.

I think to our Negro youth, if you want to look at a man who came up in the South, a man who came up perhaps without having an ideal system-because an ideal system in this world does not exist-but you might say a disadvantaged system regionally at that time; but a man who worked within the system; who worked to improve the lot of his fellow airmen, the fellow military people, whether they were black or white. He was not discriminatory in his practice, but a man who was a dedicated American, who made that very clear. I just regret that we have lost such a great American because we need him so much today. Senator THURMOND. I believe there is another black four-star general, General Davis. I do not know if you ever knew him.

Mr. McDONALD. I did not know him.

Senator THURMOND. A very fine, able man who contributed greatly to his country.

In my State of South Carolina Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday is not observed as an optional holiday. The people in the State can observe his birthday, or Robert E. Lee's, whichever they prefer. Would you agree with this approach, for the States mainly to handle this matter since celebrating birthdays is chiefly the responsibility of the States, rather than the Federal Government; and that there has to be something very unusual for a person to have his birthday celebrated by the National Government.

Mr. McDONALD. I would certainly agree with the distinguished Senior Senator from South Carolina that this approach on a State-byState basis would be far preferable, I also believe that we are perhaps too close in many ways to the life of Martin Luther King, and we may not have as clear a vision as perhaps future historians may have. That is why I have come and testified today.

I believe that at this point we may be moving toward a national birthday of the image and not the reality, and that would be a mistake. Senator THURMOND. If Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday was set aside by either Presidential proclamation or congressional resolution to be simply observed as a special holiday by local option, and not a legal holiday, do you think this would be a more appropriate way to observe this date, in view of the high cost to the Government, about $200 million, if we should make it a legal holiday?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, Senator, I certainly feel that would be by far the more preferable way to go.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Is that to admit that it deserves some consideration as being a holiday?

Mr. McDONALD. I think my testimony is very clear on that point. I am saying between the two options the local option is by far the best, it is within the limits, or within the needs of a given State area, and I think it would be the preferable way to go between the two options. My testimony, I think, however speaks to the overall subject. Senator THURMOND. Any other questions?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Senator, I just have one. I would like to know, what is it that Booker T. Washington did that he could be considered instead of Martin Luther King, what were his characteristics; what was it about that man?

Mr. McDONALD. I am glad you asked that question. As you know, he is the author of the book, "Up From Slavery." He pointed out to the Negro Americans, to the black Americans that, "Yes, we have come up from slavery, the bottom level of the ladder, and we should not be, perhaps, so preoccupied with trying to become instant leaders. But we should gain knowledge of two four-letter words." We live in a time when four-letter words are very popular among some segments of our society, but in the case of Booker T. Washington I think they were most apropos because he said the two words "wash"-w-a-s-h-and "work." Intimating that you can be poor, but you can also be clean and work by standards of personal cleanliness, and also work to make yourselves productive citizens in the new land, and to gain respect of your fellow members of the community. Out of that respect you will find that your children and their children will be able to move up to all levels of the American society.

I think not saying, "demonstrate in the streets," as the criticism of Reverend Jackson, as he also pointed out that is not the way, but to work within the American system, which is the greatest system guaranteeing individual liberty, more than man has ever witnessed. Mr. WILLIAMS. I think he also said, "Brush your teeth."

Mr. McDONALD. He also said what?

Mr. WILLIAMS. "Brush your teeth," that was Booker T. Washington, carry a toothbrush.

So, he seems like someone who tells black people to brush their teeth, wash up, and work. I have no further comments.

Mr. McDONALD. I have a comment on that. You know, as a physician, you do not have to be a physician to say that, speaking to a people who perhaps had come from a society in another continent where they had maybe not the similar background of how to cope with many problems, I think in writing to urge that they become a productive member in the American society, urging that people should work to be a productive citizen, gain self-respect and respect of your fellow men; to earn self-respect, not to demand self-respect whether you earned it or not, but trying to work toward that. I did not know that he said carry a toothbrush and keep clean; that is is not bad advice, though.

Mr. WILLIAMS. You need to read your copy of "Up From Slavery" again.

Mr. McDONALD. I never knew that carrying a toothbrush was the central theme of it. I think we could all read it if you think it is.

Mr. WILLIAMS. By the way, by the time Booker T. Washington wrote, the majority of black folks in America were American citizens and did not come from Africa.

Mr. McDONALD. I understand that. I would not for 1 minute suggest that they were coming from Africa, that would be absurd. I think the record will show that the basic culture or heritage came from one—I mean, you are wearing a necktie today and you are wearing a shirt which would be a western style shirt, western style necktie, Americanized. I am not saying it is good or bad, or better or worse, I am simply saying that as we make a transition from one culture to another some of my forebears came from Scotland. I do not go around wearing a kilt, that is sort of passé. Another side of my family is Cherokee Indian. If you want to talk about a group that has really been discriminated against, those were the Indians. I think there are many fine Indians that we might point to with pride as great leaders.

But I think our emphasis should be to point to the American system, and point to it as Americans first and try to improve the system, rather than as separate divisions, increasing disunity. I think that does no service to our national goals, but only serves those who would destroy us.

Senator THURMOND. Thank you very much, Congressman, for your presence here. We appreciate your testimony. You have the reputation of being one of the most able Members of Congress, and we thank you for coming over and testifying.

Our next witness is Mr. Clifford J. White III, National Director of Young Americans for Freedom.

Mr. White, you go ahead and testify, I will ask Mr. Hultman to preside until I get back.

STATEMENT OF CLIFFORD J. WHITE III, NATIONAL DIRECTOR, YOUNG AMERICANS FOR FREEDOM

Mr. WHITE. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure and honor for me to speak today on S. 25, the proposal to make Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday a national holiday. As representative of the 55,000 members of Young Americans for Freedom, the Nation's leading conservative youth political and educational organization, I am here to urge the committee to reject the proposal.

National holidays are important occasions for all Americans. When an individual is recognized-or rather almost canonized-through a national holiday in his honor, it is understood that the individual had a unique and indispensable impact on this Nation's history. So great a recognition is this that only Christopher Columbus and George Washington have in this way been honored. To so recognize Martin Luther King, a patriotic American to be sure, would be to classify him along with Washington-and above Lincoln, Jefferson and Adams. We would do this without the benefit of being able to put his memory under the test of time.

Young Americans especially have reason to respect the work of Martin Luther King. Whether or not one agrees with all of his political activities during the turbulent decade of the sixties, I think he did accomplish much good. He helped to alter the social fabric so that my contemporaries and I did not grow up with segregation and racism as a Government sanctioned, socially acceptable practice.

However great Martin Luther King may have been, his impact on American history has not yet stood the test of time. Those who oppose efforts to increase America's defense expenditures, to decrease Federal social welfare programs and to lessen Federal regulation on the States often point to the memory of Dr. King. They say that the current budget-cutting mood is racist and against the ideals for which Dr. King stood. Those who would continue U.S. sanctions against ZimbabweRhodesia say that to recognize the new regime there would be racist. Indeed, Dr. King's closest advisers are very prominent in the Carter administration. The question is: Should the U.S. Congress decide that all of Dr. King's past actions and perhaps by implication the current activities of his former followers are above reproach? Was Dr. King's wisdom on the Vietnam war necessarily correct? Were his efforts to increase Federal social welfare programs always wise?

If we want to pass a bill which will in some small way bring this country, black and white, rich and poor, closer together, then by all means create a national brotherhood day, or some other such holiday. Do not redefine the American political tradition and declare unequivocally that American presence in Vietnam was immoral or that poverty is caused exclusively by racism. In my view most Americans reject these notions. Public opinion surveys indicate that to the contrary, most Americans want us to build up our national defenses and to decrease Government economic regulation, in expectation that more jobs will thus be created and poverty will be diminished.

I am reminded of my philosophy courses which taught Immanuel Kant's concept of the "moral imperative." The German philosopher said we should act each day only as we would expect others to act in the future.

If the U.S. Congress creates Martin Luther King Day, then perhaps it is saying that past generations should have in this way recognized their contemporary heroes. Imagine a George Armstrong Custer Day. Revisionist history teaches us that he was not deserving of the martyrdom which was conferred on him by his contemporaries.

Let me make a suggestion with which I believe most Americans, at least most members of Americans for Freedom would agree. If you must create a Martin Luther King Day, then please also create a John Wayne national holiday. I can think of few Americans who have

stood with such stature in the past half century of American history. A national hero John Wayne was without question.

Of course, I could understand why this committee might not want to take such action. To do so might lead to more national holidays than is wise. After all, there are economic consequences of creating national holidays. According to the Civil Service Commission, taxpayers lose $195 million in lost productivity from Federal workers. The last thing the Congress probably wants to tell its constituents is that it has increased their tax burden even more.

In conclusion, I ask the committee to reject S. 25. Please, do not tell young Americans that Martin Luther King's memory-as it is construed by many to mean antidefense, pro-government spending, and other such political positions-is beyond reproach. Perhaps after several years, after the vagaries of contemporary politics are behind us, maybe then we can proclaim that Martin Luther King and his dream that "one day this Nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed, 'we hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal' " is a national treasure never to be forgotten. Thank you.

Mr. HULTMAN. Mr. White, thank you for your testimony. I apologize for the Senator not being here, but he had read your statement ahead of time and he will be right back.

I do have two questions that I would like to propound to you that I think would be helpful for the record. You indicate in your statement that a national brotherhood day, or some similar observance would achieve the same impact that might be had by singling out Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Do you think most Americans would support such an observance, such as national brotherhood day?

Mr. WHITE. I think they probably would, and I think that it would be certainly preferable to creating a day in honor of one single individual. I think you have probably seen during today's and the previous day's testimony you had on Martin Luther King day that we are not talking about an individual about whom there is consensus opinion. So, if we really do want to help end divisions, then let us create a national brotherhood day. Let us make the concept of what we are trying to achieve into national law as a holiday.

Mr. HULTMAN. Also, Mr. White, would you not agree-and I think you just alluded to it-that perhaps history is a better judge of man's contribution to society than is the judgment of his immediate contemporaries who maybe share his same ideals and objectives?

Mr. WHITE. I agree without question. I pointed out in my testimony the example of General Custer, who was a hero in his day, but probably is not a hero to most Americans today. If we do not want to memorialize the particular vagaries of contemporary politics, then let history judge. Then let us honor Martin Luther King, or whatever individual we want to honor, in order to communicate the message, that all Americans-black or white-were created equal. I think that is the objective of the legislation; however, I do not think that S. 25 will accomplish the goal. I think only the test of time could tell us whether Martin Luther King is the best person who has embodied the spirit of brotherhood.