Document QMmgOg0nXQoVLo8kgnbqbBDk7

- MAY 30 1975 EVERETT H. BELLOWS May 28. 1975 Copies to: G. J. Henrich OLI 2821 1 ftNA't Dally Rapartar System DAILY REPORT FOR EXECUTIVES Devel pm nts Affecting pol,cies 5-27-75 Legislation--Regulation--Rulings (No. 102) A - 1 BANKING: REUSS READY TO MOVE CFTT^PN-E" COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW ChaJilqan Henry Reuss (D-Wls) of the House Banking Committee said in a Memorial Day (May 26) s)$b$ch at Louisiana State University that he hopes his committee can begin work shortly on the'proposed comprehensive review of the Financial Institutions and the Nation's Economy (FffJfii In a speech to the Sblwol of Banking of the South in Baton Rouge, Reuss stated: "So far, we have spent a dozen hours thijjking up the FINE acronym and about 20 minutes on the sub stance. We hope to reverse thos^priorities shortly. " The review, which will be ca^Ned out by the Banking Subcommittee on Financial In stitutions Supervision, Regulation, and Ih^urance, will be under the auspices of the Chairman of that subcommittee, Rep. Fernand St Gerfh^in (D-RI). (DER 80, A-7, Section B) Reuss, how ever, stated that all members of the full commhtee will participate in the review, and that the panel does not "intend to repeat the work of group^djat have gone before." He added: "We know what St. Thomas Acquinas thought of usury, without ah(her research project. " Reuss previously had hoped to involve the Senate Khi^ing Committee in the FINE pro ject, but Senate Banking Chairman William Proxmire (D-Wis)V^portedly was cool to the idea, so Reuss decided that the House committee should go on alone. The FINE study, as announced previously by Reuss, will cov^^five areas: (1) the relationship between banks and thrift institutions, and what changes ma^fcje desirable in their borrowing, lending, investment, and customer service activities; (2) the aobquacy of federal regulations, as now divided between three government agencies for banks alonfe>J3) the structure and operations of the Federal Reserve System; (4) the operation of U, sNijanks abroad, of foreign banks in the U. S., and of the Eurodollar market; and (5) the operaHpji of bank holding companies. The text of the Reuss' remarks at Louisiana State University School of Banking is in Section B. 0- - JUPREME COURT: JUSTICES LET STAND RULING UPHOLDING NEW FEDERAL STANDARDS LIMITING USE OF VINYL CHLORIDE The U. S. Supreme Court today let stand a federal appeals court ruling upholding new federal regulations drastically cutting the amount of exposure to vinyl chloride permitted for factory workers in the plastics industry. (Firestone PJastics Co. v. Labor Dep't) The Court declined to review a ruling by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit being appealed by Firestone, Union Carbide Corp., and the Society of the Plastics Industry, which claimed the Second Circuit used the wrong standards when reviewing the regulations. Effective April 1, the regulations limit the exposure of workers, to one part of vinyl chloride to a million parts of air breathed. The old standard was 50 parts per million. Vinyl chloride has been shown to have caused the death of 13 workers suffering from a rare form of cancer of the liver. OLI 2822 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, INC., WASHINGTON, D C. 20037 Fi*ht of reproduction *nd redittnbution rerv*d A - 2 (No. 102) BUSINESS POLICIES (DER) 5-27-75 The companies had told the Second Circuit that the Secretary of Labor, who adopted the regulations under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, had disregarded the fact that it Is not technologically feasible to reduce the concentrations of vinyl chloride in plastic plants to the prescribed level. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers supported this position. The Second Circuit, however, said the standards were "entirely feasible, since the goal of the lowest dectectable level can definitely be attained through the combination of technological means and respirators. " The Supreme Court's action today leaves the standards effective in New York, Vermont, and Connecticut. A similar action in an earlier case made the same type of reviewing standard final in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, anclDelaware. 0 ECONOMIC CONTROLS: SUPREME COURT SAYS CONGRESS CA\IMPOSE CONTROLS ON STATE EMPLOYEE SALARIES >he U.S. Supreme Court today upheld the constitutionality of the Economic Stabilization Act of 19/Ssas applied to salaries of state and local government employees. The ma^rity, speaking through Justice Thurgood Marshall, said that the controls were a valid exercise okCongress' power to regulate commerce. The Court rejected the argument that the regulations unconstitutionally infringed rights reserved by the states by the Tenth Amendment. (Fry v. DvS.) When the wage and salary freeze was imposed in 1971, state and local government em ployees constituted 14 percenNrf the nation's work force. Unrestrained wage increases to that many workers could, according to the Court, have had a significant effect on interstate and even foreign commerce. For example, such wage increases could inject "millions of dol lars in purchasing power into the ecohomy and [could] exert pressure on other segments of the work force to demand comparable increases. " The Court concluded that the efficacy of the controls would have been "drastically imjfcured" if these employees were beyond the reach of the Act. The Court said the argument that the contbqls interfered with state sovereignty is fore closed by a 1968 Supreme Court decision that upheuJugpplication of the Fair Labor Standards Act to state-run schools and hospitals. In the majority's vi^w, the wage controls were "even less intrusive" than the federal involvement in the prior caseVv Justice William Rehnquist dissented, saying that federaHv-imposed wage and salary ceil ings on state employees violate the Tenth Amendment. JusticeSyilliam Douglas, citing the Act's expiration last year, would have dismissed the Court's grantspf review in the case. ANTITRUST: SEN. HART ANNOUNCED MORE HEARINGS ON BILLS TO REVISE ANTITRUST LAWS \ Chairman Philip Hart (D-Mich) of the Senate Judiciary Antitrust and Monopolv Subcom mittee today announced more hearings for June 3-6 on S 1284, the Antitrust ImprovertV^ts Act of 1975, and S 1637, to amend the Antitrust Civil Process Act. S 1284. introduced by Hart and Senator Hugh Scott (R-Pa), would provide for a major\ overhaul of the antitrust laws. Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS. INC., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20037 Right of reproduction and redistribution reserved