Do they consider that, if they transferred education, the education of the Indian could be improved, too?

Mr. COHEN. I believe that their position is that they look upon this as the Federal Government withdrawing from its financial responsibility for the total support of Indian activities. In other words, they say this is an entering wedge to the Federal Government escaping its financial and other responsibilities for Indians.

BETTER ADMINISTRATION OF INDIAN AFFAIRS POSSIBLE

Senator RIBICOFF. But if they were assured that the function would be better administered and better directed and still continued to be financed by the Federal Government, would they still object to it, if this were all explained to them carefully?

Mr. COHEN. Well, I would hope that that could be explained to them. I think it would require some time. I would have to add that there is one big philosophical question thta has never been totally reconciled in the educational field, and that is whether it is desired that there be complete integration of the Indians into the cultural life of the white man or the maintenance of a kind of separation of their activities in separate schools. And there is a very strong difference of opinion on that matter, about how you regard the future of the American Indians, and I think perhaps that element in the difference of opinion is a factor for not getting a complete agreement. Senator RIBICOFF. What do the Indians want?

Do they want their separate schools, or do they want to be integrated into the overall school system?

Mr. COHEN. Miss George has been working with the Indian groups, and she might be able to tell you what their view is. I am not certain.

DESIRE FOR INTEGRATION IS INCREASING AMONG INDIANS

Miss GEORGE. One of the problems about the segregation aspect is the fact that Indian children attending Federal schools usually reside in isolated areas, so that under any jurisdiction they would not be in school with very many non-Indians. Geographical isolation would be the major factor. They want to have a choice, to have an opportunity to select whether they want to stay where they are or become more mobile like the rest of the population. There has been a large increase in the number of Indians moving to urban areas in the last 10 years especially, and I think that this shows that Indians do desire to become integrated into the community and into the schools in those areas.

Senator RIBICOFF. I know, but don't you think there is an obligation on our part to give the Indians the best type of schools and the best of opportunities? Do you think this is being done by the present policies that puts education in the Department of the Interior?

REPORT STRESSES IMPROVEMENT OF INDIAN EDUCATION

Mr. COHEN. I would say, Senator, at least from this report that we made, that quality education for the American Indian has not yet been achieved, and I think that there is a lot more that can and should be done to improve education for the Indians.

Senator RIBICOFF. Well, what does that report recommend?

Mr. COHEN. That report represented an attempt to discuss with the Indians what these problems are and what might be done, and it lists on page 5 a series of meetings held in 1966 in Denver with the Indian leaders about their concern, and I will read you just a part about it.

Indian representatives stressed concern about the transfer of education from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the Office of Education. Fearful of 'termination' of federal activities in their behalf, they are generally opposed to the disruption of the traditional relationship which has existed with the Government. They indicated distrust of the fragmentation of Indian services within the Federal Establishment and felt their welfare would suffer if these functions were further divided between agencies other than remaining concentrated in the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Then, skipping a paragraph

Participants in the second meeting maintained that Indian education must be viewed in the context of the considerable variation among and within tribes, taking into consideration such differences as levels of economic and social development and educational expectations. They felt that educational programs should recognize the different problems of Indians in Federal and public schools and should consider the readiness of local or State systems to provide quality educational services. They recommended further that local studies be undertaken, with the assistance of Indian groups, non-Indian groups, and State and Federal officials; and that Governors of the States involved should call attention to the need for improvement of the educational opportunities for Indians in public schools.

The consensus of both meetings was that the Bureau of Indian Affairs should be given time to carry out its new educational program before serious consideration is given to transfer of the education function from one agency to another.

INTERIOR AND HEW MEET WITH INDIANS

Senator RIBICOFF. What are you doing now?

Have you stopped the dialog between the Indians and Interior and yourself?

Mr. COHEN. No, the dialog has continued during this period of time. Our Deputy Assistant Secretary, Mr. Colmen, who is responsible for continuing this dialog, has been meeting with the groups. In fact, he is not here today, because he is out in the West continuing those meetings. But I must say that, from what I know as of now, there has not been any singular change in the attitude of the Indian leaders with regard to this question.

INDIANS HAVE BEEN NEGLECTED

Senator RIBICOFF. I do not think there is any group in our society that has been as shabbily and badly treated as the Indians. We forget them. We neglect them. They are so small in number that other groups, seeking and deserving of greater opportunity, receive the attention, and the Indians still suffer from basic neglect and tragedy. Certainly health and education is the key to the development of the Indian as an individual or as a tribe. And it would be my hope that both Secretary Gardner and Secretary Udall would most patiently continue to pursue these efforts, because I know what was achieved in the field of health when the transfer was made, and my thinking is that this could be achieved in education, too, if the transfer was made to the Department of Education.

I think, with patience in explanation and communication, this could be pointed out and plans made to show how changes would be made

without affecting the tribal customs of the tribes themselves or the individual Indians.

Mr. COHEN. I would like to say, Senator, that Secretary Gardner is very much concerned about the fact, the point that you make, that the quality of Indian education could be improved.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AIR AND WATER POLLUTION PROGRAMS

Senator RIBICOFF. Now, you oppose transferring air pollution from the Department on the grounds that this is a matter of public health which is located in the Department whose primary concern is health. Yet a change was made in water. How do the air and water programs differ?

Mr. COHEN. Well, let me read you from my paper which I think attempts to answer that question.

If you will turn to page 11 of my statement
Senator RIBICOFF. What page, sir?

Mr. COHEN. Page 11, sir.

I say:

AIR POLLUTION AFFECTS PUBLIC HEALTH

The proposed transfer of responsibility for the air pollution and solid waste programs to the Department of the Interior might well create more problems than it would solve. To be sure, air and water pollution, in particular, are often talked about as though they were twin problems, but are they really so much alike? The fact is that they are not, even though they have many things in common; indeed, among all our natural resources, including air, water, soil, and mineral resources, the air is unique in many respects. The air is not a commodity available for sale, as minerals and even land are. The air does not always travel in the same channels, as water does; airsheds cannot be defined with anything like the degree of precision possible with watersheds. We are not free to decide how we will use the air, nor can we decide to use part of it for one purpose and part of it for another. Neither do we have the option of storing any portion of the atmosphere for future use. To one degree or another, all these choices are open to us with respect to the management of water, soil, and mineral resources. But the air-the Nation's entire air supply-must be available to sustain human life. We do not even have the option of purifying it before we inhale it. We must breathe the air as it comes to us polluted or not. And while a great deal has been written and said about the capacity of the atmosphere to dilute and disperse the pollutants released into it, the fact is that despite daily and seasonal variations and despite geographical differences, the air in all parts of the country has only a very limited capacity to purge itself of pollution. It follows, then, that the techniques applicable to the management of other natural resources are only slightly, if at all, applicable to the protection of the air resource. This dichotomy certainly would not be eliminated by assigning the responsibility for air pollution research and control activities to a Department of Natural Resources.

Senator RIBICOFF. Well, do you figure that the public health would suffer if air pollution were transferred to a Department of Natural Resources?

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATIVE REASONS

Mr. COHEN. Well, I think the primary problem, as I see it, is, first, a matter of policy and, secondly, a matter of administration.

On policy, I think that in putting this in the Department of-what is now the Interior where you have the Bureau of Mines and where you have major concern for the producers of coal and oil, which are part of the great sources of pollution, you are putting the regulator and the regulated, in a sense, together in the same basket, and I think

out of that it would be difficult, unless you had completely separated administration, to have the public health be the paramount interest. I think when we have a conflict, a potential conflict, between public health and the economic exploitation and utilization of the natural resources, it is very likely, in my opinion, that the public health would suffer and be subordinate to the economic realities of the time.

In other words, the immediate concerns would drive out the longer interests. That would be my primary concern.

RELATIONSHIP WITH STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENTS WOULD BE MORE

COMPLEX

On the administrative, as I have said, we must rely on the State health departments, and the Muskie bill which has passed the Senate relies a great deal on the State health departments. That is a normal administrative relationship of the Public Health Service. If you divide and break that relationship and further fragment it, by transferring that to any other department, I think it would weaken and complicate and make more complex the Federal-State relationship between those departments. Thus, I do not see that it would help one iota. I do not see how air pollution control would be advanced 1 day sooner or 1 degree faster by transferring it, and the only thing I can see is that the public health concern might be subordinated.

REDUCTION OF AIR POLLUTION IS MAJOR GOAL

Senator RIBICOFF. Now, in June, the Task Force on Environmental Health and Related Problems submitted a report to Secretary Gardner seting forth 10 action goals for the Department. The first goal reads as follows:

An air quality restoration effort to initiate by 1970, in 75 interstate areas, abatement plans to reduce plant stack emissions by 90 percent and to establish national standards to reduce vehicle exhaust emissions by 90 percent from 1967 levels, through a enforcement and a technological program to provide the equipment necessary to meet the standards.

Do you think this goal can be reached?

What must be done to accomplish it, and what action is your Department taking to reach it?

Mr. COHEN. I would like Dr. Prindle, who is the Director of the Bureau of Disease Prevention and Environmental Control, to answer that question.

Dr. PRINDLE. Mr. Chairman, we have reviewed these goals which were set by the so-called Linton committee. We feel that many of these are highly desirable goals, and we concur with their general principles. They were reviewed not only by us but by a number of other departments and other outside groups as to the feasibility of specifics, that is, as to the setting of, say, 90 percent as a desirable goal in a certain period of time. I think, in truth, many of these goals can be reached in the time periods that are stated.

I think there is a serious question as to the economic impact of taking such action so rapidly, as far as gaining this through a Federal operation. I believe, however, that in setting some of these specifics, this can be solved and we intend to.

You are aware that the Department has asked for increased funds and support for the air pollution program. We anticipate building a rather major activity in research and development along these lines, specifically with respect to the emissions of sulphur oxides.

In this particular case, we have launched a major activity of research and development involving industry as well as the Federal Government.

Senator RIBICOFF. Well, I have no further specific questions.

Your statement has been entered in the record as if read, and we do appreciate your coming today.

The subcommittee will stand adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., a recess was taken until 10 a.m., Friday, October 20, 1967.)