You might even be executed, if a jury found you guilty of "treason," "espionage," or "sabotage."

S. 1, officially known as the "Criminal Justice Reform Act of 1975," has prompted an outpouring of opposition from trade unions, civil liberties groups, and civil rights organizations.

"The bill’s alleged purpose is to revise and reform the United States Criminal Code," notes the American Civil Liberties Union pamphlet Stop S. 1, "but the real purpose of important parts of the bill is to perpetuate secrecy and stifle protest."

Indeed, S. 1 is the capitalists’ answer to Watergate--not a bill to curb government violations of democratic rights, but a bill to intimidate future Daniel Ellsbergs, silence antiwar GIs, break up demonstrations against government policy, and prevent dissidents from expressing their views.

The bill’s authors, have even dusted off old witch-hunting legislation, such as the Smith Act, and included it in S. 1, despite the fact that provisions in these laws have been ruled unconstitutional.
 
November 27, 1950
Why were so many CIO-endorsed candidates defeated on Nov. 7? Why did organized labor’s worst enemies, like Taft, score overwhelming victories? Why has the CIO suffered a one-third drop in membership? How can the CIO effectively combat the coming anti-labor offensive and intensified witch-hunt of the new Congress?

These are the burning questions that faced the 600 delegates to the 12th CIO national convention, which began on Nov. 20 in Chicago. But all the evidence of the first two days of the convention indicates that the CIO leaders are determined to evade or ignore these questions.

CIO President Philip Murray’s published report and his keynote address, the resolutions brought out by the Resolutions Committee headed by United Auto Workers President Walter Reuther and the apathetic discussion have already revealed that these leaders are concerned only with covering up for false policies silencing criticism, and shifting blame.

Above all, they give every indication of their intentions to continue their same blind and dangerous course. This is evidenced most strikingly in their attitude toward the question that is uppermost in every active, thinking unionist’s mind: What road should labor take in politics after the disastrous setback of its policies in the past elections?  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home