Office of the Historian

59. Letter From Secretary of State Rusk to the Director of the Bureau of the Budget (Bell)1

Washington, December 21, 1962.

Dear Mr. Bell:

I understand that the Department of Commerce has submitted to your Bureau for consideration a draft legislative proposal for the establishment of a separate foreign commercial service.

I have reviewed a copy of the draft proposal and am opposed to it or any similar action that would remove the commercial function overseas from the Foreign Service.

My objection is based on the following principal considerations:

1.
The ultimate test—that of getting the job done most efficiently and effectively at our overseas posts—is best met by keeping economic and commercial work integrated; splitting these inter-related functions into separate services would only create problems and wasteful duplication.
2.
Virtually all of our Ambassadors favor an integrated economic-commercial operation for both substantive and administrative reasons. Objection is predicated on knowledge of present circumstances and past unsatisfactory experience under a separate service.
3.
The existing State-Commerce Agreement gives Commerce full participation and indeed a primary role in all commercial matters. The Agreement has been operative only eight months.2 Given a reasonable chance, the Commercial Specialist Program can accomplish within a unified service all that a separate service could accomplish, without the inefficiencies and problems inherent in a new and parallel service abroad.
4.
Appropriation history, including experience on 1963 budget proposals, strongly suggests that the overseas commercial program would fare no better if it were budgeted for under a separate service.
5.
The Commerce proposal is incompatible with recommendations contained in the Herter Committee report on which we plan to move forward vigorously.

It would seem much more positive and fruitful to me for State, Commerce and the Bureau of the Budget to pull together to strengthen—not weaken—our total effort to attain our commercial goals within [Page 110] our foreign policy and balance of payments objectives. If the State-Commerce arrangements need revision for this purpose, I suggest that this be done within the framework of the Agreement.

Sincerely yours,

Dean Rusk3
  1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1960–63, ORG 4–COMM. No classification marking.↩
  2. See Document 46.↩
  3. Printed from a copy that bears this typed signature.↩