As to coordination, however, I was somewhat concerned over what I feel was a lack of a real sense of interagency cooperation. It just seems to me that one of the greatest contributions of this bill is, and will be, the improvement of administration, and the maximization of results. Let me make a suggestion here. May I ask if consideration might be given toward including in the committee report some specific reference to the need for interagency consultation relating to certain existing, as well as proposed programs involving research contracts and grants?

I have reference, for example, to biochemical contracts let by the Department of Defense.

I looked into some of those, as well as into farm research. I went into some of the veterinary medicine under the auspices of the Department of Agriculture. I looked at the existing grants by the National Institutes of Health, and the programs of the National Science Foundation and other agencies.

It seems to me that the instrument proposed here by Senator Hill and cosponsors of the act, could act with some additional machinery as a real coordinating force, not taking over the responsibilities of other groups, but giving a more direct, a more logical sense of direction, the way I see it.

Now, in terms of internal coordination, also, may I suggest that the committee consider giving a specific indication that it will expect maximum coordination with the new Institute, in terms of research, which is conducted under the auspices of the International Cooperation Administration, in connection with its public-health-type research programs?

Now, I do not seek to say anything critical of any particular group. But it seems to me, and I say to the Secretary and to our Surgeon General, that the ICA medical program could stand a good deal of what I call careful watching and coordination with the excellent work which is going on presently under the United States Public Health Service. I would just like to see that kind of well-coodinated competence in charge of it, Dr. Burney.

I believe you are the type of man that can give it.

Now, another point I would like to encourage is the matter of encouraging regional contacts.

I suggest that the committee give consideration in its report on this bill to indicate that it would look with favor upon efforts to encourage regional cooperation among scientists.

My talks with many leaders abroad concerned the importance of the seeding of ideas within Europe, that is, not attempting to encourage exchanges exclusively along transatlantic or transpacific lines.

Let me digress to say that we Americans are prone to feel on occasion, if we do not check ourselves quite carefully, that the benefits to medical research will come primarily when we can have the facilities, the manpower, and money coming from the United States to Europe. Actually, there is a great deal that can be done by the mingling of, let us say, Italian scientists with Swedish scientists, and Danish doctors with Finnish doctors, and French doctors, Belgian doctors, in a regional area.

I found, too, among almost everyone I talked to, that the one problem these countries face is the lack of travel funds, Mr. Chairman, for symposia or for congresses and conferences.

I remember Dr. Virtanen of Finland told me of the value if he could have a little money whereby some of his younger people could attend a congress at Vienna, or a symposium at Rome, or vice versa. If the young people from Helsinki, or Rome, or Milan could come to Copenhagen, and people from Moscow and Brussels could go to Copenhagen, the cross-fertilization of ideas would be very helpful. But presently they do not have any money. Their funds are so limited that they have to use what they have for on-the-spot research. I want, too, to add the fact that the pressures in many of the European countries are directed toward clinical research-I mean research to get the person healed right now.

When you talk to some of these Finnish scientists, you can see how desperate they are for money for basic research.

This is what I have hoped, and I know Senator Hill has in mind, in great measure, that basic research be strengthened.

Now, I happen to concur with Senator Yarborough and the bill itself, of course, on the importance of keeping this Institute within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, under the Surgeon General, so to speak. In other words, I want to keep it out of the context of foreign policy per se.

Secretary Flemming, your statement was very fine, in reference to what the indirect effects of such a program as this will be to our foreign policy, but this is not a foreign policy program.

The CHAIRMAN. May I interrupt you there? I think we must keep it out of international politics.

Senator HUMPHREY. Absolutely. I think Senator Yarborough developed that very well. In my first memorandum, I underscore the absolute importance of keeping this away from in any way being an instrument in the cold war.

As a matter of fact, we ought to seek even greater cooperation between health scientists in Poland, in Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union, and other nations dominated by different ideologies and those whose countries share our own. As men of science rather than as men representing governments they can truly cooperate to serve mankind.

I am going to be very blunt about it. If somebody can find a cure for cancer, I do not care if it comes from Afghanistan or the Soviet Union or any place else, I am all for it, and ready to contribute to it. I think we have to look upon this strictly as a nonpolitical measure, as the Secretary himself has indicated.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, may I make one suggestion, which I know goes straight to what your thinking is, and to what your contributions have been directed in this wonderful field of medicine and hospital care, and so forth. That is that we might think of a separate section, prior to the concluding sections of this bill, which would convey, not only approval, but encouragement for the strengthening of private, voluntary efforts on the part of nonofficial United States and foreign organizations.

The CHAIRMAN. May I say that the Secretary is nodding his head in agreement.

Would you like to say something on that suggestion, Mr. Secretary? Secretary FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, I concur wholeheartedly, just as I do in the point Senator Humphrey made earlier, to the effect that we ought to make it very clear that we are not going to provide funds

as a substitute for funds that are already being invested or used in these areas, that we are trying to supplement what is going on in the world, not just pick up a load that some other people have already picked up. I think these two go right hand in hand.

Senator HUMPHREY. I just have some suggested language which has no particular excellence, but which represent some words which the committee may want to look over. And I will file this with the

chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well, the statement and memoranda will appear in full in the record at the conclusion of the Senator's remarks (see p. 199).

Senator HUMPHREY. Finally, I want to say this: That one of the most encouraging things it has ever been my privilege to encounter is that when you go from doctor's office to doctor's office in country after country, from scientist's office to scientist's office, you see on their shelves books which were manuscripts of scientists of the United States of America, and of doctors of the United States of America. You realize our tremendous lead in the sense of the great excellence of our scientists and of our doctors. We have really taken the leading role.

The most encouraging thing of all is when you see the reliance overseas upon the capacities and abilities and intelligence and professional skill of our doctors and scientists and others.

It seems to me that this program is to maximize just that. I cannot think of anything that would be more helpful than to get this resolution passed quickly. I hope to see it implemented promptly. What we need is a zeal for this goal.

I am sure that every one of the witnesses before me knows that. I mean, we need a real zeal to maximize the bill's application.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator, I am impressed and gratified with your statement with reference to the excellence of existing National Institutes of Health.

Any questions, Senator Yarborough?

Senator YARBOROUGH. No.

Senator HUMPHREY. I have a lot of nice words in here about the chairman. I will just file this statement and attached memoranda. The CHAIRMAN. We won't fail to put them in the record.

Senator COOPER. I would say he is always an inspiration, whether you agree with him or not. He inspires you.

Senator JAVITS. We can only appreciate Senator Humphrey's statement, and especially his going out in the field and bringing back a factual on-the-spot report which, by the way, is the best of any I have had a privilege to hear and I am delighted that he favors this legislation.

The CHAIRMAN. He has not only learned a great deal, but he speaks with authority because he has been out to see the situation firsthand.

Senator HUMPHREY. One of the most thrilling experiences I have ever had was when I heard about prenatal care, and maternal care, which is an experience that no one could ever forget. It is really something to see these wonderful scientists in these fields.

Dr. Minkowski was a gentleman I met in Paris in the maternity and child-care hospital, with these premature little babies. The work that

is being done there in basic research, in the prenatal field, just touches the heart of every living soul. If our country can contribute to this by a few dollars which Senator Hill is recommending, I want to tell you it will make everybody in America feel a little bit cleaner, just a little bit better.

That is one of the reasons I am for this. I think there is a lot of good soul washing that is needed in these days of the cold war and I think this is a good way to do it.

up.

You had better get me out of here, Mr. Chairman-I am all steamed

I ask now that my statement and attached memoranda appear at this point.

(The statement and memoranda of Senator Humphrey follow :) Mr. Chairman, I should like to express my appreciation for the opportunity of testifying this morning on this very important legislation.

Senate Joint Resolution 41 will be, in my judgment, one of the outstanding landmarks of this or any recent Congress.

I shall confine my oral remarks this morning solely to the matter of adequate financing of the legislation.

In my judgment, authorization of funds in the order of $50 million would represent a sound and reasonable goal for the proposed new Institute.

To confirm that fact, I will base my comments not as a composer of this bill, nor as an interested member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Rather, I will base my remarks on the substantial evidence of research needs which has come to me from scientists throughout America and the world, in my capacity of chairman of the Senate study of world health. This study is, as you know, being conducted by a subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations.

TRIBUTE TO SENATOR HILL

First, however, I would like to express a personal word of tribute to the man who is the moving force behind this bill, the chairman of this committee, Senator Lister Hill.

Let it be noted that three-fifths of the Members of the Senate are cosponsors of his legislation. Each of us is, like myself, proud of our role in this connection. But let the record be clear that the basic author of this bill, the one man to whom more is owed for the inspiration and preparation of this bill than any other man inside or outside the Congress, is my distinguished friend from Alabama.

Mr. Chairman, you have sponsored a great many laws in the field of health and in other fields for which this Nation is deeply grateful. But I say that on this particular bill, you have your finest hour. It is one of the most farsighted of all the many great contributions which you have made.

MAJOR FACTS OF THE BILL

Let us summarize now the principal points as I see them :

(1) The case for this legislation has, in my judgment, passed beyond the realm of controversy. Senate Joint Resolution 41 is so helpful, so necessary that, in my judgment, there need be no dispute as to the worthwhileness of this legislation.

(2) If a specific authorization figure is to be set under the bill, the amount now specified, $50 million is quite reasonable. It is reasonable in relation to need, in relation to desirability and, yet, in relation to feasibility.

I should like to point out that $50 million is not much more than 1 percent of the amount which the Congress will probably be asked to approve in this year's mutual security legislation.

I should like to point out further that the U.S. Congress will approve this year some $40 billion for our Armed Forces and for weapons of destruction. It is hardly disproportionate to allocate an amount of $50 million for weapons which will heal, which will save life, which will promote world friendship.

FOUR CHECKS AGAINST OVERSPENDING

No matter what authorization this bill contains, $50 million or more, there are ample checks to prevent the spending of so much as one dollar which might not prove necessary.

The

The first check is that of the separate appropriations process itself. Senate and House Committees on Appropriations will have ample opportunity to determine how much money should actually be allocated during any fiscal

year.

The second check is that of the Advisory Council for International Medical Research, which will be created under this bill. There is every reason to believe that this council would and should follow the same high standards of careful screening of applications for money, as do the present Advisory Councils in the National Institutes of Health. There should be and will be no relaxation of the high professional standards to which an advisory council adheres. That is a second check.

The third check is, of course, this committee itself, and its House of Representatives counterpart. Both committees will, I am sure, follow closely the developments under this legislation, once the law is approved.

And the fourth, but by no means final check, is that of the Bureau of the Budget itself in its capacity to make available or withhold actual funds.

CAPABILITY OF HEW WITNESSES

With reference to official Bureau of the Budget policy, let me make one point clear:

I fully respect the difficult position of witnesses from the executive branch.

I have the highest regard for the distinguished representatives from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and other agencies who appear in the committee room this morning. They represent as fine, as gifted a group of administrators as may be found in any programs of the U.S. Government. Their sincerity, their interest in health is so well known that it hardly needs reiteration upon my part.

Comments which I make on the need for adequate funds under this bill are not intended as a reflection on any of these distinguished witnesses. My comments are directed principally to policies within and above the Bureau of the Budget.

I definitely disagree with any effort to put arbitrarily low financial ceilings on this bill.

THE AILMENT OF "BUDGETITIS"

There is an ailment which I call budgetitis. It is characterized by an obsession in favor of low statistics on balance sheets and a forgetfulness about the needs of people, human beings.

Budgetitis results in the weakening of good ideas like this bill. It delays them, stunts their growth.

Of course, budgets are necessary; they are indispensable.

But the function of government is to serve people and not serve the neatness of double entry bookeeping.

A healthy America and a healthy world are the best assurance of sound U.S. budgets in the future.

Let not this bill become, therefore, the victim of executive branch budgetitis. Actually, if one were to judge this legislation in hard, mercenary terms, one would say that it is inexpensive legislation. What we are doing is “buying" some of the greatest scientific talent in the world and often at a cost far lower than what we could secure in our own country.

This bill will not in the slightest detract from the necessary amounts which should be spent among American researchers. But our own top scientists are the first to agree that there is a vast pool of scientific genius throughout the world which is largely untouched and whom this bill will help to make available.

THE FUNDS COULD BE USED SOON

Now, lastly, I address myself to the question: "Can this money be spent in the order of $50 million within a foreseeable period?" I say the answer is "Yes." Of course, it will take some time for machinery to begin to operate under this bill. I should like to point out, however, that there is available right now an enormous backlog of need in many countries. This backlog could be speedily