COJAEC (continued) |
Previous | 5 of 9 | Next |
|
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
COJAEC Report #1 Page 3 I followed this up with a long letter to the associate counsel to the President and his cabinet secretary, who is also a personal friend, requesting that the White House use its good offices to "tone down" the critical report of the Justice Department. liy understanding is that both the Budget Bureau and the White House did ask the Justice Department to reconsider its position and was able to secure a more friendly letter from them. Of course, the letter is still rather adversary and hostile, but because time in this session of Congress was running out on us, rather than going back to the Justice Department to request another reconsideration of their position, it was decided to submit the second letter drafted by the Deputy Attorney General William P. Rogers, to the House Subcommittee on Claims. Though the letter itself was dated June 15, it was not received by the Subcommittee until June 24. ■ The Deputy Attorney General's letter to the Subcommittee is two, single spaced pages long. It was accompanied, however, with a 16 page, single spaced memorandum explaining in detail the Justice Department's views on H. R. 4673» Briefly, the Department agrees that a compromise settlement procedure is needed if the program is to be completed in the immediate future. But it objects strongly to the liberalizations proposed in the Hillings Bill on the grounds that these liberalizations would give to the larger claimants "a better break" than the smaller claimants received. COJAEC Replies On the invitation of the Subcommittee on Claims, we analyzed the Deputy Attorney General's letter and the accompanying memorandum and explained our position refuting the Department's objections. . . A 15 page, double spaced letter was sent to the Committee Chairman, Emanuel Celler, of New York, who, in turn, directed the letter to the Subcommittee on Claims. A 28 page, double spaced memorandum was included as part of COJAEC'S answers to the Justice Department. The letter charges the Justice Department with treating evacuation claims legislation as purely routine, when, because of the background facts relating to the program, it should be considered as something extraordinary and special. It accuses the Department of completely-ignoring the recommendations of a congressional committee and of attempting to defend their adverse precedent-setting adjudications. In addition, it summarizes our principal arguments for making compensable claims of internees and corporations and involving pre- and post-evacuation expenses, fair crop values, management and. conservation costs, and fair rental value. The COJAEC memorandum discusses point by point the specific arguments made by the Department and makes the COJAEC answer. In addition, a substitute bill was drafted, in the nature of an amendment to H.,R. 4673. This substitute bill takes into consideration certain acceptable suggestions of the Department of Justice and clarifies other language to make more certain that what COJAEC wants will be included in the final legislation. The substitute bill provides that the Attorney General may compromise and settle any .claim without regard as to amount' or percentages. If the claimant is not satisfied with the offer, he may then.petition the Court of Claims for a judicial determination of his claim. In addition, the substitute bill provides for the consideration of claims of internees and corporations and defines as compensable such items as fair rental values, fair crop values, and management expenses and conservation costs. In lieu of the individual determination of pre- and post-evacuation losses, including transportation costs, a lump sum payment in the form of an indemnity is provided for every evacuee» A 14 page, double spaced memorandum accompanies the substitute bill. This memorandum explains the differences between H.R. 4673 and the substitute bill and why these differences were proposed. Where it follows the suggestions of the Department of Justice and where it fails to do so, are also explained.
Object Description
Title | House of Reps. Bill |
Description | A collection of government documents is presented. In more specific, a House of Representatives bill was presented. |
Subjects | Redress and reparations |
Type | image |
Genre | Government record |
Language | eng |
Collection | Hirasuna Family Papers |
Collection Description | 8 items |
Project Name | California State University Japanese American Digitization Project |
Rights | Rights not yet transferred |
Description
Local ID | csufr_hfp_0846 |
Project ID | csufr_hfp_0846 |
Title | COJAEC (continued) |
Creator | Masaoka, Mike:author |
Date Created | 1955 - 07 - 08 |
Subjects | Redress and reparations |
Type | image |
Genre | Government record |
Language | eng |
Collection | Hirasuna Family Papers |
Collection Description | 8.32 x 13.97in |
Rights | Rights not yet transferred |
Transcript | COJAEC Report #1 Page 3 I followed this up with a long letter to the associate counsel to the President and his cabinet secretary, who is also a personal friend, requesting that the White House use its good offices to "tone down" the critical report of the Justice Department. liy understanding is that both the Budget Bureau and the White House did ask the Justice Department to reconsider its position and was able to secure a more friendly letter from them. Of course, the letter is still rather adversary and hostile, but because time in this session of Congress was running out on us, rather than going back to the Justice Department to request another reconsideration of their position, it was decided to submit the second letter drafted by the Deputy Attorney General William P. Rogers, to the House Subcommittee on Claims. Though the letter itself was dated June 15, it was not received by the Subcommittee until June 24. ■ The Deputy Attorney General's letter to the Subcommittee is two, single spaced pages long. It was accompanied, however, with a 16 page, single spaced memorandum explaining in detail the Justice Department's views on H. R. 4673» Briefly, the Department agrees that a compromise settlement procedure is needed if the program is to be completed in the immediate future. But it objects strongly to the liberalizations proposed in the Hillings Bill on the grounds that these liberalizations would give to the larger claimants "a better break" than the smaller claimants received. COJAEC Replies On the invitation of the Subcommittee on Claims, we analyzed the Deputy Attorney General's letter and the accompanying memorandum and explained our position refuting the Department's objections. . . A 15 page, double spaced letter was sent to the Committee Chairman, Emanuel Celler, of New York, who, in turn, directed the letter to the Subcommittee on Claims. A 28 page, double spaced memorandum was included as part of COJAEC'S answers to the Justice Department. The letter charges the Justice Department with treating evacuation claims legislation as purely routine, when, because of the background facts relating to the program, it should be considered as something extraordinary and special. It accuses the Department of completely-ignoring the recommendations of a congressional committee and of attempting to defend their adverse precedent-setting adjudications. In addition, it summarizes our principal arguments for making compensable claims of internees and corporations and involving pre- and post-evacuation expenses, fair crop values, management and. conservation costs, and fair rental value. The COJAEC memorandum discusses point by point the specific arguments made by the Department and makes the COJAEC answer. In addition, a substitute bill was drafted, in the nature of an amendment to H.,R. 4673. This substitute bill takes into consideration certain acceptable suggestions of the Department of Justice and clarifies other language to make more certain that what COJAEC wants will be included in the final legislation. The substitute bill provides that the Attorney General may compromise and settle any .claim without regard as to amount' or percentages. If the claimant is not satisfied with the offer, he may then.petition the Court of Claims for a judicial determination of his claim. In addition, the substitute bill provides for the consideration of claims of internees and corporations and defines as compensable such items as fair rental values, fair crop values, and management expenses and conservation costs. In lieu of the individual determination of pre- and post-evacuation losses, including transportation costs, a lump sum payment in the form of an indemnity is provided for every evacuee» A 14 page, double spaced memorandum accompanies the substitute bill. This memorandum explains the differences between H.R. 4673 and the substitute bill and why these differences were proposed. Where it follows the suggestions of the Department of Justice and where it fails to do so, are also explained. |