tana delegation, Congressman Leroy Anderson from the First District and Congressman Lee Metcalf from the Second District. We hope, Mr. Chairman, that this evidence of unanimous support on the part of the entire Montana delegation will not only be made part of the record but will be taken into consideration in the study of this bill as it affects the Indians of our State of Montana. Senator DOUGLAS. That will be done. Senator MANSFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator DOUGLAS. Thank you very much, Senator Mansfield. (The letter referred to from Senator Murray to Senator Douglas, together with supporting documents, follows:) Hon. PAUL DOUGLAS, UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Chairman, Production and Stabilization Subcommittee, Washington, D. C. May 14, 1957. DEAR PAUL: On March 8 I appeared before your subcommittee in support of S. 964, particularly those features of the bill which would provide for a grant and loan program for Indian tribes and encouragement of industries to locate on or near Indian reservations. I regret that a meeting of my Interior Committee precludes my attendance at your hearing today during which you will hear testimony on these aspects of the bill in which I am especially interested. Several able representatives of Montana Indians, with whom I appeared before the Indian Affairs Subcommittee yesterday, will I know have some interesting and useful facts for the consideration of your subcommittee. I am asking Senator Mansfield to present for me several additional documents which, in my opinion, strengthen the case for passage of S. 964. One of these documents is a letter from Mr. P. F. Roys, director of the Montana State planning board. On March 1, I sent Governor Hugo Aronson of Montana and members of the State planning board copies of S. 964 and H. R. 5468, dealing with the same subject, along with analyses and supporting statements by the authors and hearings on last year's area redevelopment, or depressed-areas bill. After considering these, both S. 964 and H. R. 5468, which is similar to S. 1433, which this subcommittee is also considering, the State planning board strongly recommended inclusion of provision for combating underemployment, which our bill would do, instead of merely unemployment, as provided for in the other proposal. The State planning board states, and I quote: "Overall, we are much impressed with the need for redevelopment aid to economically depressed areas, but feel that such legislation would be of little or no help in solving the problems of economic distress that currently exist or are likely to occur in this and other Western States unless provisions are made to assist predominantly rural areas, and unless some means of attack is included for eliminating the problems of unemployment and underemployment which are so widespread on Indian reservations." Mr. Chairman, I also place in the record a letter I received from Mr. John Woodenlegs, president of the Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council. Modest beginnings of industrial development are being made on that reservation. As Chairman Woodenlegs points out, a great deal more could be accomplished if some more financing were available. I also wish to have printed, as part of my statement, an editorial from the March 8 issue of the Great Falls Tribune, entitled "Montana Legislative Memorials Stress Federal Indian Neglect," and letters in support of S. 964 from the Cascade County Trades and Labor Assembly in Great Falls and Great Falls Lodge No. 1046 of the International Association of Machinists. Mr. Chairman, some years ago it was my privilege to sponsor successfully the Full Employment Act. The proposed Area Redevelopment Act can accomplish great things for the people of this country, just as the Full Employment Act did. and I strongly urge this subcommittee to recommend passage of S. 964 and inclusion of those present features of the bill which would do so much for our Indian 91201-57-pt. 1--48 citizens and all rural America as well as the depressed areas in more thickly settled portions of this country. Sincerely yours, JAMES E. MURRAY, United States Senate. MONTANA STATE PLANNING Board, Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, The United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: In accordance with your request of March 1, 1957, the Montana State Planning Board has reviewed S. 964 and H. R. 5468 pertaining to area development legislation now before Congress. Overall, we are much impressed with the need for redevelopment aid to economically depressed areas, but feel that such legislation would be of little or no help in solving the problems of economic distress that currently exist or are likely to occur in this and other Western States unless provisions are made to assist predominantly rural areas, and unless some means of attack is included for eliminating the problems of unemployment and underemployment which are so widespread on Indian reservations. These conclusions are based on the following considerations: The Senate bill is essentially national in scope, since it provides a means for stimulating and maintaining economic stability in rural as well as industrial areas, and it has the added feature of assistance to Indian tribes within such designated areas. It is noted that the House bill does authorize the Secretary of Commerce to assist rural areas and rural communities, but the assistance apparently would be conditioned exclusively on the existence of an unemployment rate of at least 8 percent, as certified by the Secretary of Labor. This is in contrast to the Senate bill, which conditions assistance on underemployment in rural areas as well as on rates of unemployment. We think this to be a very important concept which should be included in area assistance legislation, since the problem of persistent underemployment is often as demoralizing as widespread unemployment. Indeed, this problem is probably more critical in our State and the other basically agricultural States in the West, as a result of the continuing trends to large-scale farming. Most certainly, it is a critical problem which exists commonly on Indian reservations. The Senate bill is also more comprehensive in broadening the aid to distressed areas to include not only loans for industrial development purposes (including the purchase of machinery or equipment), but also loans for public facilities and grants for public facilities-all available on equal terms to either industrial or rural redevelopment areas, and consequently to Indian tribes in such classified areas. We feel that the supplemental provisions of loans or grants for public facilities in redevelopment areas can aid significantly by adding stimulus to occurring industrial developments and to the prospects for further development. This is because the trend of modern industry is to locate in attractive, wellplanned, modern communities. Similarly, assistance in the modernization and expansion of public facilities would improve the ability of areas experiencing new development to cope with the increased demands for public services which inevitably arise. Few, if any, communities which are depressed would be in any better position to finance public facilities than they would be to finance industrial developments, and most certainly not with the ease or under the conditions that are available to prosperous growing communities. As a consequence, without public facilities assistance it is likely that a considerable lag would exist in community improvement behind industrial expansion in areas which made some headway toward redevelopment, and to such an extent that the process of economic rejuvenation may be stopped or seriously slowed. Among the important elements common to both the Senate and House bills are the provisions for technical assistance and vocational education. With respect to technical assistance particularly, it has been the experience of this office that most communities have some economic growth potential, but that the local citizens are most commonly inexperienced and are too involved in their normal day-to-day operations to disclose and evaluate their potentials. Accord ingly, expert consultation and assistance along both technical and economic lines could be most helpful. In fact, it is our judgment that an effective program of technical aid is underlying to the success of the entire program. There seem to be ample safeguards in both bills to insure that loans made under the programs will result in more than temporary increases in employment since it is intended that loans for industrial expansion purposes will be made only for projects conceived on sound economic and technical probabilities. Actual results, however, depend upon effective administration of the program. It follows, then, that extreme care must be exercised to avoid assistance in projects which tend to perpetuate an unstable or dying industry rather than those which would diversify and stabilize the basic economy. In this regard, the Senate bill limits the maximum participation by the Federal Government to 75 percent of the aggregate cost of the project, whereas the House bill specifies 35 percent. If the underlying philosophy of the proposed type of legislation is to help those areas and industries which help themselves, it would seem that a 50 percent limitation would be more realistic and would tend to reduce the dangers of assisting in the financing of uneconomic projects. Further, is is noted that the House bill provides that a finding by a State agency is necessary before assistance will be provided. The Senate bill makes no such provision. Since all States now have economic development agencies or other organizations concerned with alleviating unemployment, it appears feasible and sound that they be utilized to the maximum extent possible. The independent judgment available from this source might further safeguard the integrity of the loan program. We are most hopeful that these comments may be of value to you and other members of the Congress in further study and evaluation of prospective legislation. Sincerely yours, Re S. 964 Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. P. F. Roys, Director. LAME DEER, MONT., April 3, 1957. DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: I acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 21, 1957, including a copy of S. 964. The First American, Inc., was organized about 1 year ago by several benevolent citizens and by working diligently they have now established a small factory at Lame Deer, Mont., where they employ only Indians who are in need of employment. These men, throughout this small corporation are doing everything possible to employ needy members of the tribe and this prevents the causing of members of the tribe to rely upon the public welfare and public assistance, rather than upon income from their labors. At the present time 12 members of the tribe are employed by the First American, Inc., and this benevolent corporation could do much more if they had sufficient finances to purchase additional machinery and equipment and buildings necessary for housing. I only wish you could watch the progress of this small institution. They are doing wonders for the members of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe by furnishing employment on the reservation, which makes a proud individual when he can be employed and wherein he can support himself and his family. I am sure that this will be a successful operation because it has successful men behind the project, who are operating the corporation. It is totally nonprofit. At the present time we understand that they have a contract for making 1 million wooden necktie racks. They are manufacturing these necktie racks at a rate of several hundred per day, and that they also have the contract for the manufacture of fishing tackle, which will be manufactured shortly, and put on the market. It seems to me that the Government would help finance an institution of this kind, as they are using every effort to assist the unemployed Indian. We understand that this corporation, The First American, Inc., has received donations of expensive machinery, which is now being used, as well as other equipment. I think that Senator Douglas and you would do well to investigate this institution further, as it goes to show how much the small project can do wonders to help rehabilitate the Indian. I will be glad to furnish further information upon the subject, if you wish, Very truly yours, JOHN WOODEN LEGS, President of Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council. [Great Falls Tribune, March 8, 1957] MONTANA LEGISLATIVE MEMORIALS STRESS FEDERAL INDIAN NEGLECT In four joint memorials to Congress and the Secretary of Interior, the 35th Montana Legislature has given recognition to special problems relating to Indian welfare and employment. In the manner of their passage these memorials given bipartisan endorsement to active efforts of Montana's Democratic senators and Representatives in Congress to obtain more responsive Federal performance to deal with Indian family subsistence, health, education, and welfare. Legislative memorials from small-population States may not have great impact on the whole body of Congress but these serve to emphasize a distress situation that is quite common to the whole Federal effort to shift American Indians from Federal wardship and reservation status to integrated citizenship in our social and economic life. This is a desirable long-time objective but it is onethat cannot be realized by mere legislative or departmental decree. Senate joint memorial No. 5 passed both the senate and house of the legislature by unanimous vote. It requests that Federal money be made available to depressed Indian areas to be utilized in promoting employment of Indian citizens at or near reservation areas in Montana. House joint memorial No. 6 requests thorough congressional study of the effect of promoting off-reservation migration upon the American Indians' family life, and the advisability of extending family assistance programs to Indians away from reservations. It applies specifically to the Hill 57 situation in Great Falls. There is a bill pending in the United States Senate (S. 964), introduced by Senator Paul Douglas, of Illinois, and cosponsored by Senators Murray, Mansfield, and others, designed to give Federal assistance along lines set forth in the Montana memorial No. 5. A Federal program more responsive to Indian needs is highly essential. CASCADE COUNTY TRADES AND LABOR ASSEMBLY, Great Falls, Mont. Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Whereas the wage earners or heads of a family in certain areas of the country are deprived of earning a livelihood because of lack of industrial development or deterioration of established industries: Therefore, be it Resolved, That the Cascade County Trades and Labor Assembly communicate its support of the Douglas depressed areas redevelopment bill, Senate bill 964 and of the companion House bill 4607 and that constituent organizations and individuals be urged to communicate likewise with Senators Murray and Mansfield and with Representatives LeRoy Anderson and Lee Metcalf and with any other congressional figures whom individuals feel inclined to approach in support of their legislation; be it further Resolved, That this body endorses Senate Resolution 3, introduced by Senator Murray, of Montana, which reaffirms Federal responsibility for Indians and proposes a "point 4" program of economic and public health aid to Indians. Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, JOHN EVANKO, Secretary. GREAT FALLS LODGE NO. 1046, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, Great Falls, Mont., March 30, 1957. United States Senate, Washington, D. C. SIR: I am writing on behalf of Machinist Lodge No. 1046, Great Falls, Mont., to urge your support of Senate bill No. 964. Would you please place my name on the mailing list for the Washington Note Book. Yours truly, ROBERT G. SCOTT, Recording Secretary Senator DOUGLAS. The next witness is the Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Honorable Glen L. Emmons. STATEMENT OF GLENN L. EMMONS, COMMISSIONER, ACCOMPANIED BY H. REX LEE, ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Mr. EMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I have here the report of the Department of the Interior just cleared this morning. I thought I would bring it over now to formally present for the record. Senator DOUGLAS. Thank you very much. I may say we addressed a letter asking for comments on S. 964 to the Department of Interior on January 31, 1957. We had made prior to this morning several inquiries as to the attitude of the Department and had not received any reply. I take it this is the statement of reply? Mr. EMMONS. Yes, sir. Senator DOUGLAS. I will make it a part of the record at this point, and then you can testify, Mr. Enimons, either on the letter or any other subject that you wish. Mr. EMMONS. Thank you, sir. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D. C., May 14, 1957. Hon. J. W. FULBRIGHT, Chairman, Committee on Banking and Currency, DEAR SENATOR FULBRIGHT: This responds to your requests for the views of this Department on S. 104 and S. 1433, bills to assist areas to develop and maintain stable and diversified economies by a program of financial and technical assistance and otherwise, and for other purposes, and S. 964, a bill to establish an effective program to alleviate conditions of substantial and persistent unemployment and underemployment in certain economically depressed areas. We recommend the enactment of S. 1433 in preference to S. 104 or S. 964. All of these bills are intended to provide programs of Federal assistance to areas and communities suffering substantial and persistent unemployment. Such a program has been recommended by the President, who said, in his message transmitting the budget for fiscal year 1958: "Legislation is again recommended to authorize the Secretary of Commerce, with the assistance of other appropriate agencies, to provide loans and other aids to communities which seem to be in chronic economic distress. This aid will help those communities to solve their basic problems." The type of program he had in mind was indicated in the President's Economic Report, transmitted to the Congress on January 23, 1957. It is our view that the provisions of S. 1433 would more adequately meet the objectives of the administration's program, as indicated in these messages of the President, than would the provisions of either S. 104 or S. 964. Of the several areas in which this Department has particular interests and responsibilities, some of the Indian reservations present a special problem with respect to their economic development and the opportunities for gainful employment. We believe that the basic solutions to this problem must necessarily be sought as part of the overall Federal program for Indian affairs, with supplementary help from such general programs as that contemplated by S. 1433. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the submission of this report to your committee. Sincerely yours, FRED G. AANDAHL, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Mr. EMMONS. Mr. Chairman, let me say first that I greatly appreciate the opportunity of coming before the subcommittee and testifying on the importance of additional economic development in those areas of the country where we have a predominantly American Indian |