REFERENCE: Vol. 134 No. 64

TITLE: WARTIME REPARATIONS

SPEAKER: MR. NUNN

TEXT: Text that appears in UPPER CASE identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.

[*S5412] MR. NUNN. MR. PRESIDENT, ON APRIL 20, THE SENATE CONSIDERED AND PASSED S. 1009, A BILL TO ACCEPT THE FINDINGS AND IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ON WARTIME RELOCATION AND INTERNMENT OF CIVILIANS.

IT WAS, MR. PRESIDENT, A DIFFICULT DECISION FOR ME TO VOTE AGAINST THE BILL. THE INTERNMENT AND RELOCATION OF THE JAPANESE AMERICANS ON THE WEST COAST DURING WORLD WAR II WAS A GRIEVOUS ERROR BUT IT WAS AN ERROR MADE IN GOOD FAITH BY AMERICAN LEADERS WHO WERE ENGAGED IN A WORLD WAR. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SHOULD MAKE AN OFFICIAL APOLOGY TO THOSE WHO SUFFERED THIS INDIGNITY AND BREACH OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. IT IS A VERY SAD CHAPTER IN OUR HISTORY. I WAS THEREFORE PLEASED THAT S. 1009 INCLUDED SUCH AN APOLOGY.

ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE THE UNITED STATES OWES THESE CITIZENS AND RESIDENT ALIENS A FORMAL APOLOGY, I REGRETFULLY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT, TAKEN IN ITS ENTIRETY, S. 1009 WAS NOT WISE. I WAS TROUBLED BY THE CONDEMNATION IN THE BILL OF OUR WAR-TIME LEADERS AND THE COMPENSATION ASPECTS OF THE BILL.

MANY OF THESE AMERICANS FOUGHT WITH GREAT VALOR AND DISTINCTION IN THE EUROPEAN THEATER LATER IN THE WAR, INCLUDING OUR COLLEAGUES SENATORS INOUYE AND MATSUNAGA. AS EVERYONE IN THIS CHAMBER KNOWS, BOTH SERVED WITH HONOR AND WERE DECORATED FOR HEROISM IN COMBAT. SENATOR INOUYE LOST HIS ARM IN COMBAT. ALL OF US WHO ENJOY FREEDOM TODAY MUST BE THANKFUL FOR THEIR SERVICE AND VALOR. I PROUDLY SALUTE THEM AND ALL OTHER JAPANESE AMERICANS WHO SERVED THIS COUNTRY WITH SUCH GREAT DISTINCTION.

IT IS CLEAR THAT IF WE KNEW THEN WHAT WE KNOW NOW, WE WOULD NOT HAVE INTERNED THESE AMERICANS. BUT IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE SETTING IN WHICH THIS DECISION WAS MADE. ONE MUST REMEMBER THAT THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN LAUNCHED AN UNPROVOKED, SURPRISE ATTACK ON PEARL HARBOR ON DECEMBER 7, 1941, RESULTING IN THE DEATHS OF HUNDREDS OF AMERICAN SERVICEMEN.

THE DECISION TO INTERN THESE AMERICANS OF JAPANESE ANCESTRY WAS BASED ON AN EXECUTIVE ORDER ISSUED BY PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT IN FEBRUARY 1942. THE CONGRESS ENACTED LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING ENFORCEMENT OF THAT ORDER AND THE SUPREME COURT SUSTAINED THE INTERNMENT OF THE JAPANESE AMERICANS. THUS, ALL THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT APPROVED AND AUTHORIZED THIS ACTION.

AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE DECISIONS OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE MILITARY OFFICERS WHO CARRIED IT OUT WERE BASED ON MILITARY INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION WHICH SUGGESTED THAT THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN HAD ORGANIZED NETWORKS AMONG ETHNIC JAPANESE IN THIS COUNTRY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESPIONAGE AND SABOTAGE. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THE FBI TOOK A CONTRARY VIEW; NAMELY, THAT THEY HAD NO INFORMATION SUPPORTING THAT CONCLUSION.

WE NOW KNOW THAT THE MILITARY INTELLIGENCE WAS WRONG, BUT IN THOSE EARLY DAYS OF WORLD WAR II, I BELIEVE THAT OUR NATIONAL LEADERS MADE THE DECISIONS THAT THEY THOUGHT BEST FOR OUR COUNTRY. WE NOW KNOW THAT THE DECISION TO INTERN THE JAPANESE AMERICANS ON THE WEST COAST WAS WRONG. AN APOLOGY IS CLEARLY NEEDED. BUT I AM TROUBLED BY THE TONE OF THE LANGUAGE IN S. 1009. IT IS ONE THING TO CONCLUDE THAT THE DECISION WAS WRONG, BUT IT IS QUITE ANOTHER THING TO CONDEMN THOSE WHO MADE IT. I, FOR ONE, DO NOT WISH TO ASSOCIATE [*S5413] MYSELF WITH A CONDEMNATION OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, GENERAL MARSHALL AND THE OTHERS WHO LED US TO VICTORY IN THAT TERRIBLE WAR.

WITH RESPECT TO THE COMPENSATION QUESTION, I AGREE THAT MORE THAN AN APOLOGY IS NEEDED. BUT S. 1009 GOES TOO FAR.

CONGRESS HAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SEVERAL MEASURES TO COMPENSATE THESE INDIVIDUALS FOR THEIR LOSSES. FOR EXAMPLE:

THE 1948 JAPANESE-AMERICAN CLAIMS ACT WHICH ESTABLISHED A PROCEDURE FOR AFFECTED INDIVIDUALS TO FILE A CLAIM FOR THE LOSS OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. OVER $37 MILLION WAS PAID IN SETTLEMENT OF 26,578 CLAIMS.

AN AMENDMENT TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT IN 1972 WHICH PROVIDED THAT THOSE PERSONS WHO WERE OVER 18 WHEN THEY WERE IN THE RELOCATION CAMPS ARE DEEMED TO HAVE EARNED AND CONTRIBUTED TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM FOR WORK PERFORMED IN THE CAMPS.

AN AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT PROVISIONS IN 1978, TO ALLOW CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT CREDIT FOR THE TIME SPENT IN DETENTION AFTER THE AGE OF 18.

S. 1009 GOES MUCH FURTHER. IT PROVIDES FOR THE PAYMENT OF A $20,000 TAX FREE PAYMENT TO EACH INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS INTERNED. NO ONE KNOWS THE TOTAL COST, BUT THE BILL AUTHORIZED $1.3 BILLION FOR THIS PROGRAM.

THE BILL, IN SECTION 206, ALSO ESTABLISHED THE "CIVIL LIBERTIES PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND BOARD OF DIRECTORS" WHICH WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DISBURSING UP TO $100 MILLION TO SPONSOR PUBLIC EDUCATION ABOUT THE RELOCATION AND INTERNMENT OF THE JAPANESE AMERICANS, TO FUND COMPARABLE STUDIES OF SIMILAR CIVIL LIBERTIES ABUSES, AND FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE ETHNIC JAPANESE COMMUNITY OF THE UNITED STATES.

THOSE ARE WORTHY GOALS, MR. PRESIDENT, BUT THERE ARE OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS IN THIS COUNTRY WHO HAVE BEEN THE VICTIMS OF GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT IN THE PAST. IN PARTICULAR AMERICAN INDIANS AND AMERICAN BLACKS HAVE CAUSE FOR COMPLAINT AGAINST PAST ACTIONS OF OUR GOVERNMENT. IS IT FAIR TO DO THIS FOR JAPANESE AMERICANS AND NOT DO THE SAME FOR OTHER AMERICANS?

MR. PRESIDENT, MONEY CANNOT RESTORE THE LOSS OF LIBERTY AND THE INDIGNATION SUFFERED BY THE LOYAL AMERICANS WHO WERE INTERNED DURING THE WAR. AND MONEY CANNOT BRING TO LIFE THE AMERICANS WHO DIED DURING THE WAR. THERE IS MUCH WE CAN LEARN FROM HISTORY, BUT WE MUST ALSO BE HONEST ABOUT HISTORY AND RECOGNIZE THAT THOSE WHO MADE AND ENFORCED THESE DECISIONS IN THE EARLY DAYS OF WORLD WAR II THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING WHAT WAS RIGHT.

FINALLY, MR. PRESIDENT, I AM TROUBLED BY THE GREAT COST OF THIS PROGRAM WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PRESSING DEMANDS ON OUR BUDGET. WE DO NOT HAVE ADEQUATE MONEY FOR CHILD SUPPORT, THE WAR AGAINST DRUGS, AND OTHER URGENT SOCIAL AND DEFENSE NEEDS. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I HAVE RELUCTANTLY CONCLUDED THAT ALTHOUGH THE JAPANESE AMERICANS SUFFERED A GRIEVOUS BREACH OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, S. 1009 IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE REMEDY.