Page images
PDF
EPUB

munication Satellite Corporation (COMSAT). It would exist not merely to maximize profits but to rehabilitate the environment. Created with the help of the federal government, but independent from it, this special-purpose corporation for housing would combine the management skills and flexibility of private industry with the scope and, in part, the funds, of the federal government. Such a corporation might be called URBX, or Urban Experimental Corporation. In addition to attacking the problem of housing. URBX would serve as a model for other special-purpose corporations that might be created to bring about change in other areas of national life.

The size and scope of URBX would permit it to fracture many of the barriers now blocking progress in the construction of housing. The on again-off again job situation in the construction industry would be stabilized by building a guaranteed number of housing units each year. The number of these units would provide both industry and unions with incentives to modify present restrictive practices. URBX could buy land outside the city for new towns, create performance criteria so that new technological approaches could be used in building, and provide the cities with such an incentive to participate in the building program that they would be willing to modify obsolete local statutes.

Cost analysis indicates that, permitted to benefit from new technology, URBX could in five years reduce the cost of a $16,000 home to $8,000. By the same period, housing units that now must economically rent for $134 a month could be rented for $67 a month. Recently, in California, a systems approach to school construction agreed to by business and labor reduced in six months the cost of school ceilings from $3.24 per square foot to $1.81. Costs for other units on which agreement could be reached were also reduced substantially-and the new schools were more beautiful and flexible than previous models.

There is a great deal of wisdom about our domestic environment located in America, but it is scattered around: In government, industry, the foundations and universities. Many able people drift off to work on other problems for lack of money or career incentives. Others duplicate one another's work, or spend frustrating hours on problems recently discovered data could simplify. We need to marshal a portion of this talent and energy in one place and provide the time and the physical equipment for scientists from various disciplines to help contribute to the process of urban change.

This pooling of scientists to help link human energy to social change would be similar to mobilization of scientists in the Second World War to apply nuclear energy to warfare. That organization was known as the Manhattan Project; we might call the marshaling of scientific effort to help solve our domestic crisis Manhattan Project II. This would show that we are as serious about improving our domestic environment as we were about creating nuclear weapons.

Already, small groups of scientists have begun to gather on their own to help social change. MARC in New York and OSTI in Cambridge are examples. Manhattan Project II would provide the means for a wider grouping of such talents. These scientists should be free to describe a whole series of alternative solutions that different cities or neighborhoods may wish to apply. Perhaps some of those in Manhattan Project II will produce charts of what we wish our cities and therefore ourselves to be like in the future. Not detailed blueprints for action-the process of change will generate those-but dreams of what we might like to become: new Jerusalems between which we could choose.

"A great city," said Walt Whitman, "is that which has the greatest men and women." One measure of men and women is the size of their dreams. The beauty of many ancient European towns is legendary. Their style and proportion come in large part from the central role of a Church, from Zeus through Roman Catholic, during the time of their creation. We, too, need a dream-a concept of what we are at the heart of plans for our environment. Or for all our efforts, we may wind up creating new ugliness, new slums, new uniformity, to replace the old.

Historically, we have been at our best on the frontier or in time of peril. The hydra-headed problems of poverty, discrimination, and urban decay are certainly the greatest challenge we have yet faced. But let those who, appalled by the size of our present crisis, count us out, remember our moments of defiance and triumph in the past. For we, too, have not yet begun to fight.

Hon. RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Jr.,

CITY COUNCIL,
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA,
March 19, 1970.

President Pro Tempore,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR RUSSELL: I am enclosing herewith a certified copy of Resolution No. 224, entitled:

"RESOLUTION

"Memorializing the President and Congress of the United States to act immediately to end the tragic waste of American lives and resources in Vietnam." This Resolution was adopted unanimously by the Council of the City of Philadelphia at a meeting held on the fifth day of March, 1970.

Respectfully yours,

PAUL D'ORTONA, President, City Council.

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CLERK

(Resolution No. 224)

RESOLUTION

Memorializing the President and the Congress of the United States to act immediately to end the tragic waste of American lives and resources in Vietnam. Whereas, The war in Vietnam is consuming $30 billion a year in public funds and has caused the deaths of over 45,000 American fighting men and countless more Vietnamese; and

Whereas, Apart from the war in Vietnam, the military expenditures of the federal government far exceed any rational defense needs of this country and tend only to serve to inflate American prestige abroad and to make American soldiers policemen for the world; and

Whereas, In an effort to bring an end to the arms race and to make possible the peaceful resolution of international disputes, it would be more meaningful to strive toward arms control and disarmament; and

Whereas, We earnestly request that our national priorities be realigned to give first preference to meeting the domestic needs of our own people in such fields as education, housing, health, public safety, transportation, environmental improvements and recreation, and to removing the injustices which are responsible for the widening divisions in our society; therefore

Resolved, By the Council of the City of Philadelphia, That we hereby memorialize the President and the Congress of the United States to act immediately to end the tragic waste of American lives and resources in Vietnam so as to give priorities to meeting the domestic needs of our own people.

Resolved, That certified copies of this Resolution be forwarded to the President of the United States, Vice-President, Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, United States Senators from Pennsylvania and Congressmen from Philadelphia, as evidence of the sentiments of this legislative body.

Certification: This is a true and correct copy of the original Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Philadelphia on the fifth day of March, 1970.

PAUL D'ORTONA, President of City Council.

Attest:

CHARLES H. SAWYER, Jr.,

Chief Clerk of the Council.

PUBLIC'S ATTITUDE TOWARD VIETNAM WAR

The CHAIRMAN. The real reason this committee is interested in this subject, as you no doubt know, is the connection between it and the war. What in your opinion is the current attitude of the typical citizen of your city toward the war?

Mr. CAVANAGH. I wish I really knew accurately. I would be probably the only political figure in the country that did know. But I think I could surmise that there is on the part of people up and down the line, no matter what their station in life, what their economic status, there is certainly a great frustration. They, in the main, just wish it would go away. They fail really to understand our continuing involvement.

There is very little defense, if any, made of our continuation in Vietnam today by anyone, at least that I meet, even people that just a few years ago were strongly committed to the supporting of the then Administration in its involvement. I don't see anybody really defending our continued involvement in that war.

PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN U.S. PRIORITIES

The CHAIRMAN. Do you feel that they are conscious of and recognize the relationship between the war and the very unsatisfactory conditions which have been described here today?

Mr. CAVANAGH. No, I don't think there is as active a consciousness on the part of enough people in that city or even in the country to equate in most instances involment in the war and not just the expenditure, but the other things that you have suggested and discussed today and these existing domestic problems. Unfortunately, I don't think that there are an adequate number of people that in every instance relate the two, relate the poverty and the social unrest and the other things to the continued involvement. They don't like either one of them, but it does not mean that they necessarily in every instance relate the two.

The CHAIRMAN. Then you are saying they are incapable of recognizing what we often call the priorities, that if we give priority to the war, to the military establishment, to the SST, and to going to the moon, that there is nothing left for these other things. Don't they recognize that?

Mr. CAVANAGH. Well, I think, Senator, when they begin to think about it or when it is presented to them, yes, they recognize it. But I think there is an attempt today, in some instances deliberate, to just obscure the whole relationship and, therefore, I think there are a lot of people because it is unpleasant who really don't want to think about it, but when forced to think about it they do recognize the relationship in these priorities.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you suggesting the media isn't presenting this to the people clearly and succinctly?

Mr. CAVANAGH. Well, I have to commend the media for much of what they have done about it, but I don't know that they necessarily have, as clearly and as succinctly as I would like to see them do it, related the domestic conditions in this country to our involvement in Southeastern Asia.

PRIORITIES CREATED BY EMOTIONAL BACKGROUND OF VIETNAM WAR

The CHAIRMAN. The involvement of Southeast Asia is simply the largest one. It comes back to the priorities. The military establishment has had the first priority. It is not just Southeast Asia. It is the war

itself which creates the emotional background against which all the other requests are considered and it has made it almost impossible to deal rationally with the other requests.

I mean here is the war going on. Then they come here for the most outlandish, the most outrageous weapons systems that only some madman can think of and you can't cut it because of the war. There is an emotional connection between our young men dying in the rice paddies of Vietnam and anything the Pentagon wants. This is what is so troubling. The war fortifies all other requests. It doesn't matter what kind of a request they come here with, whether it is FOBS (fractional orbital bombardment system) or ULMS (underwater long-range missile system) or any of these strange things or research programs. We have the most outrageous selection of research programs in social sciences all over the world funded by the Pentagon. Why can't we eliminate them? In some strange way it is connected with the Pentagon. The Pentagon runs the war in Vietnam. Our young men are dying and, therefore, you can't touch anything in the military and that is why we have had $80 billion and more for the military. It isn't just the war. It is a package which has created a sense of priority that then carries over into the space programs.

One of the reasons why the space program is so outrageous in its size is that in a vague way it has been tied in with defense. We must be first on the moon and in space. We have had those slogans. He who dominates outer space dominates the world and all this kind of shibboleth that we have been fed. All of it is really in a sense tied back into the emotional instinct, the old tribal instinct of defense connected with military establishments. We have had very great difficulties.

What I mean is that those who have had a different view, who have attempted to restrain to some extent these outrageous expenditures in this field, have always failed. I think the reason they failed is because of the emotional background of the war.

I think our constituents ought to understand and I don't think we can cure it unless they do, unless they are disillusioned with expenditures for things which have no real relation to the welfare of the people.

With that I yield the floor to the Senator from New Jersey.

Senator CASE. I hope the chairman won't go away because I think we might

The CHAIRMAN. I am not attempting to go away. Where do you think I am going?

Senator CASE. I would like to have two witnesses to talk to. The CHAIRMAN. This witness is very good. I am sorry you were not here.

AUTOMATIC SHIFT IN PRIORITIES AFTER VIETNAM WAR DOUBTED

Senator CASE. I know he is great and I join you in welcoming him to this hearing. But I may have a somewhat different view than the chairman. What I mean is-and I will just throw it out to you and I will let you testify on it, if you would, or just comment on it-I am not sure at all if we ended the war in Vietnam tomorrow, if we cut out the space program, if we cut out all of the great strategic weapons systems, that we would automatically do anything more to the cities. I think that

it does have some effect, obviously. It would be a little easier if we had more free resources to do with. But I don't think we would by any means do very much more unless there were an enormously greater effort on the part of all of us to rouse the Nation to these public needs, and that I would like you to comment on because I don't want people to think of lying down on the job of trying to persuade people what these needs are and how important they are. Nor do I want people to be overcome by what I think is the illusory hope that if the Vietnam war were ended we would automatically have more resources and they would go here.

There is going to be an enormously great outcry for tax reductions and for paying off the debt and for doing things that won't give one penny more to the needs of the cities or the urban areas or the fight on pollution or any of the rest of it unless we establish this truth. Is that correct?

Mr. CAVANAGH. Yes, Senator. I had mentioned earlier certainly one of the things though that ending the war and that involvement would do would be to remove a very convenient excuse for not spending this money which would certainly be the first step. But I had earlier said that I didn't delude myself into believing that if this war and that expenditure and some of our other military expenditures were cut back or cut out, that suddenly all of this money would now be spent on facing our domestic problems.

DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL URBAN POLICY RECOMMENDED

But I think at the same time today we ought to be doing in this country, the development as I said in my prepared testimony of a national urban policy to rank with our foreign and economic policies so that we would have this set of priorities about which you, Mr. Chairman, have spoken and many of us have been speaking about now for a number of years.

This isn't a very new position for me. I was speaking about this back in 1965, 1966, and ever since that time. Thank goodness today there are many more public people who now recognize it and are starting to speak about it, but I think that public persons have the greatest obligation to be doing far more than we are doing in spelling out the things that you just suggested, Senator.

POSSIBILITY OF ACTION ON DOMESTIC PROBLEMS NOW

Senator CASE. We can do much more of it. Why did we cut the excess profits tax? Why don't we keep it on and spend the money for the cities right now when half the people in this country are not working full time. We are not training ourselves. Now, there is this sense in which the chairman is right, I think, and that is at the national level. He has some feeling, and he is quite astute in this way, that we have an attention span that is limited.

The CHAIRMAN. We can't think of all of these with the war.

Senator CASE. I think it is because we are not in the habit of doing that. If we really accepted this as a national problem of the highest priority, as it is, we wouldn't have too much trouble thinking of it and Vietnam at the same time. I would like to attack it more on the

« PreviousContinue »