to present a worthwhile approach, one that we can hope to sell the Congress in this particular field.

We deeply appreciate your presence.

Thank you for coming and spending the time with the committee. Mr. MACDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your kind words, and I also wish to thank you, on behalf of the United Steel workers of America, for permitting us to appear.

Mr. BAILEY. Now we have some unfinished business.

On yesterday's list of witnesses we had the Rt. Rev. Msgr. Raymond J. Gallagher, of the Catholic Charities.

Monsignor, will you come forward and further identify yourself for the reporter?

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, before the monsignor testifies, I wonder if I could make an inquiry of the Chair as to what the plans of the committee are for the rest of the day. I see it is a quarter to 12, and I was wondering whether there would be a reasonable lunch break, or whether we are going through without interruption, so as to hear all eight or nine witnesses.

Mr. BAILEY. Will the gentleman from New Jersey agree to come back after lunch?

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I will reluctantly agree, if that is the Chair's intention.

Mr. BAILEY. Then, as there is agreement, we will have a lunch period at a due time, with the understanding that you will be present afterward.

STATEMENT OF RT. REV. MSGR. RAYMOND J. GALLAGHER, SECRETARY, NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC CHARITIES

Monsignor GALLAGHER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Monsignor Raymond Gallagher. I am secretary of the National Conference of Catholic Charities, 1346 Connecticut Avenue, here in Washington.

Among the institutional and agency services rendered by our members are 339 homes for the aging, providing institutional and nursing care to 31,371 guests. Our diocesan Catholic Charities program includes 375 agencies, all of which are directly concerned with the need of our aging people for additional service, care, nad facilities.

I wish to endorse the concept of an independent commission as outlined in H.R. 10014. A little over a year ago, by virtue of legislation introduced by Mr. Fogarty, the White House Conference on Aging was convened here in Washington. As a member of the national committee, and as a member of the planning committee for the program of the White House Conference, it was a revelation to learn the multiple concepts and concerns to which the White House Conference had to address itself in order to do justice to the needs of our aging people.

It seems to me that the proposals of this bill serve to guarantee the wide, multiphased approach to the problems of the aging so admirably begun by the first White House Conference on Aging.

The extent of the items of great moment to the aging far exceeded the limited area of responsibility which is now identified as the responsibility of the Special Staff on Aging of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. While we respect the proper aline

ment of certain problems of aging within the purview of the Department of HEW, it seems to me that coordination and correlation of all Government activities on a much wider level would be most helpful.

In viewing the needs of our aging population, in addition to the health and welfare considerations, we are faced with the need to involve principles of economics, religious programs, income, maintenance devices, labor practices relative to retirement, fruitful utility of the valuable skills of older people. These among other serious considerations will best be served by the development of an independent commission that can operate on such a level as to give adequate consideration to all these fields.

It is my belief that this proposed commission would be truly representative of all of the interests which have a stake in a fuller, better life for the aging. By reason of its independence it will be able to give constant attention and highest priority to the affairs of the aging without competing with other health and welfare needs in order to occupy a center stage of this Nation's activities. It will serve to give dramatic emphasis to the need for significant improvement in the pace of programing for the aging.

We note with complete satisfaction how rapid progress has been made in other areas of special concern when legislation has given them an identity all their own. I refer to the National Institute of Mental Health.

As I understand the proposal, it would accomplish that same wide gaged approach to the problem with the hope being ever present that research will be conducted and made operational, legislative programs devised and introduced, specialized programs of assistance established and administered, all within the day-by-day program of this Special Commission on Aging.

I interpret the inclusion of an advisory committee, which will number among its members private individuals knowledgeable in the field of the aging, as a declaration of intent to make the fullest possible use of existing agencies, institutions and programs, whether of Government or private voluntary auspices. The involvement of such representative groups within our national community guarantees a similarly representative list of solutions to the problems at hand.

It is my hope that through such independence and breadth of interest that the aging and their needs will never be allowed to deteriorate in the public eye into a group categorized as a liability to society. On the contrary, we would expect that such a commission, commanding the respect of the people of our Nation, will contribute mightily to the maintenance of the integrity and self-esteem of our elder citizens. More damage than we care to admit has already been done in this area by incidents of rejection in our social, economic, and labor practices. It is fondly to be hoped that a byproduct of the successful functioning of a U.S. Commission on Aging will be a restoration of the thinking of all Americans to that level of regard and respect which is appropriate for the elder members of our society.

I have addressed myself only to the section of the bill which provides for the establishment of a U.S. Commission on Aging. The absence in my remarks of any reference to the other phases of the bill in no way indicates disapproval. I feel sure that others of high competence in those areas have testified or will testify before this committee.

I wish to express my gratitude to the chairman and members of this Committee on Education and Labor for the opportunity of presenting this point of view.

Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Frelinghuysen, you had some questions?

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, Monsignor, I just want to say I regret you were listed as yesterday's witness, and I hope that none of those listed as today's witnesses are going to be casualties of what happens here today in the way of undue delay in disposing of all of them.

I was interested in your testimony. I would like to ask you a couple of questions along the same lines that I asked our previous witness. I notice you used the expression again: "The need for dramatic emphasis on improving the pace of programs for the aging."

Do you envisage this new commission, if it is to be established, as a group one of the functions of which will be to lobby for legislation, to dramatize what remains to be done, or what is being done that is not appropriate or adequate? Is that what you figure this will serve as a focal point for?

Monsignor GALLAGHER. I would consider, among other functions of the commission, that it would have the obligation of conducting such a clearinghouse of information that it could always act through the Members of the Congress as a voice regarding the latest and the most exact statistics of need in areas that should be coming before the Congress.

The word "lobbying," has such connotations in our current vocabulary as might seem to cast an untoward light on that particular function; but I would think that its primary obligation is to do its best on the basis of valid statistics of need to contribute to the knowledge of the Members of Congress as to the exact importance of such legislative matters as might be introduced before it to alleviate the condition of the aging.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. There seems to be something so essentially undramatic about the statistics as a way of dramatizing anything, particularly the need to improve existing programs, that I wonder whether we should not anticipate something a little more aggressive on the part of the Commission.

Mr. BAILEY. If the gentleman would yield to the Chair, I might remind him that there is an inhibition in our present statutes as to departments of the Federal Government engaging in propaganda and acting as lobbyists before the Congress.

I do not think it has been enforced in the past as much as it probably should have been, but nevertheless, if there is a special commission set up on the aged and aging, they would have to come under the same regulations that permit lobbying of the Congress by the different departments.

I

The fact of the matter is that their appropriation bill has an inhibition. They cannot use any of their funds for lobbying purposes. do not say it is not being done, but I just would like to remind the genleman from New Jersey of that.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I would like to thank the gentleman for making such a telling criticism of the proposed commission, because it seems to me two witnesses this morning have indicated that this would be an important function.

87006-62-pt. 1—27

Mr. BAILEY. The gentleman from New Jersey has no proof that a commission set up on the aged and aging would engage in lobbying the Congress.

Mr. FREYLINGHUYSEN. Well, the Monsignor is here to defend himself still, and we have a suggestion that perhaps one of the functions of this new agency should be, as he puts it, to give dramatic effect to the need for a significant improvement in the pace of programing.

I do not know what else that could be, except that it would be a proper instrumentality for suggesting by legislative recommendations to Congress that we do something that we are not presently doing. Perhaps we should not call it lobbying. Perhaps it would not come under the law which the Chair has referred to. But it certainly would be a way of stimulating a greater degree of interest.

I am not necessarily saying that it is an evil thing, and I am sure that Monsignor Gallagher is suggesting it is a good thing. But at any event, it could be interpreted as a form of lobbying. The form would have to be carefully circumscribed, in view of the laws against it, especially in view of the fact that this commission presumably will be financed by the Federal Government.

Monsignor GALLAGHER. Could I respond further to your original question that I made a rather fine distinction between the function of lobbying and the supplying of pertinent information to the other arms of our Government, the legislative arm of our Government, to guide it in the passage of its legislation?

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Could I ask you the direct question: Should such a commission make recommendations for legislation? Monsignor GALLAGHER. I believe it should, yes.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I would assume so, too.

And I am not trying, I assure you, to put words in your mouth, but I would assume that this would be a proper function of such a commission, if it should be established.

I am somewhat puzzled about the role which you feel this commission would play. You suggest that the proposal to establish an Advisory Commission should be interpreted as a declaration of intent to use existing agencies, and yet in almost the same breath you praise the new agency as one which would have independence; which would seem to say that they could make recommendations not to abide by the existing structure, but make proposals to change it.

Are you proposing that this is going to accomplish something in the field, or that it is simply going to utilize what is presently there and perhaps make it better known to those who would be beneficiaries of the various programs?

Monsignor GALLAGHER. I would take exception to the interpretation you placed upon the words "making use of the voluntary agency and activity," as being particularly vulnerable to recommendations that would be harmful to it, by reason of the activity of this

commission.

As I understand the makeup of the membership of the Commission, it would have private individuals, who, if they are knowledgeable in the field, and not representatives of government-the conclusion follows to my way of thinking that they would be private individuals already active in the field of service to the aging, and therefore representative of the point of view of the voluntary group.

My experience in working with other Government committees, the Advisory Council on Child Welfare, and the Committee on Public Welfare, has been that the net result of the contribution made by the representatives to the voluntary field has been the other way around; that there has been a willingness on the part of the representatives of government on such committee to actually integrate into their final recommendations the theory which this Nation has long espoused; that is, to make the best possible use of voluntary citizen activities; that it has not been the tradition of our Nation to act in such a way as to snuff out the interest and the activity of individual primary citizen groups, such as I feel would be the representatives of the private citizen category.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. But is it not true that proponents of a proposal to establish the U.S. Commission on the Aging are basically not altogether happy with the existing structure and activities of the existing agencies, and that such a commission might do something in the form of a house cleaning to provide more adequate services?

Monsignor GALLAGHER. Such is not my interpretation of their unhappiness with the present condition.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Well, why are we doing it? Why are you you here, except that you are not too happy, and you think we can improve conditions for the aging, dramatize the problem, and perhaps go after them more aggressively?

Monsignor GALLAGHER. I felt that your comment was too broad; namely, that their unhappiness is perhaps with the ineffectiveness of the present special staff on aging to function as vitally and in as unobstructed a manner as possible, as it should function in order to accomplish the dramatic things that have to be accomplished in behalf of the aging; so that the Commission seemed to us to be a device not to criticize the present activities of the special staff on aging of HEW, but to acknowledge that under the present structural setup they were handicapped in their ability to bring to the attention on an independent basis, and with such volume and such dedication to the cause of the aging, the real problems that exist; that they are kind of hamstrung by the departmental arrangement or by the fact that they must compete with so many other dramatic needs, many of which seem to be taking priority, that we are faced with the obligation to a large section of our population, with the same degree of dedication that we now have for other groups, but yet are not provided with even the identity as much as the Children's Bureau represents a clear identity of the interests of children.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. But you are not suggesting taking the special staff on the aging out of HEW and setting it up separately? Monsignor GALLAGHER. No, sir.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. So how does that solves the problem of inattention? And I do not know who is obstructing. You refer to unobstructed efforts. Who is obstructing in HEW or elsewhere the efforts of this staff now? If we only could get some observations from the departments involved, I would be happier.

Monsignor GALLAGHER. It would be of advantage to us to hear of their frustrations and their struggles; yes.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I have no further questions.

Mr. BAILEY. Monsignor Gahhagher, it was my pleasure a few months ago to have an opportunity to visit one of the 339 homes