Harry Truman

These things cannot be done by business, labor, agriculture, or government acting alone.

It is with these considerations in mind that I transmit to the Congress a brief summary of the economic situation and recommendations for action at this time.

These and other Government policies are providing strong supports to business activity and are enlarging the opportunities of private business.

I do not believe that the mining industry as a whole wants to adopt the policy that the Government should guarantee it against loss in time of emergency.

I am presenting herewith a Midyear Economic Report to the Congress.

Many of the price adjustments that have taken place have been healthy, and afford ground for expectation that our economy will work its way successfully through a difficult period of transition.

In my opinion, it would be a serious error to introduce at this time a new principle-insurance against war-caused losses.

While the mining industry differs in many respects from other industries, I find no valid basis for the discrimination proposed by H.R. 834.

This is supplementary to the Economic Report of the President of January 7, 1949, and is transmitted in accordance with section 3 (b) of the Employment Act of 1946.

We should not, however, be lulled into a false sense of security by these favorable aspects of the situation.

Some incomes were disproportionately high.

Approval of this bill would likely result in demands by many other classes of persons for amendments which would grant similar relief to them.

I am returning herewith, without my approval, the enrolled bill, H.R. 834.

I have repeatedly called to the attention of the Congress the need for stronger powers and more active measures with which to wage the never-ending fight against monopoly.

As a consequence, we now find that to a greater extent than ever before, whole industries are dominated by one or a few large organizations which can restrict production in the interest of higher profits and thus reduce employment and…

Since the end of the war, other matters, both foreign and domestic, have at times appeared to overshadow the monopoly problem, or at least have been the subject of greater public pre-occupation.

I am whole-heartedly in favor of your subcommittee's objectives as you have outlined them to me.

During the war, this long-standing tendency toward economic concentration was accelerated.

The second major policy f desire to lay before you has to do with the growing concentration of economic power and the threat to free competition in private enterprise.

The Committee's study showed that, despite half a century of antitrust law enforcement, one of the gravest threats to our welfare lay in the increasing concentration of power in the hands of a small number of giant organizations.

In an effort to assure full opportunity and free competition to business we will vigorously enforce the antitrust laws.

Thus, in my State of the Union Message in January, 1947, I said:

There is no move that we can make.

I certainly am. Missouri is my home State, and I shall express my opinion freely in the Missouri campaign.

They are considering it. We discussed the matter at the meeting Monday, to study the advisability of bringing it up again.