Mrs. CHISHOLM. For example in Alabama, blacks form 30 percent of the State population yet only 2.4 percent of the State employment service are black. In Mississippi, blacks constitute 42 percent of the population but only 7.2 percent of the employees in the State employment service.

In North and South Carolina blacks comprise 24.5 percent_and 34.8 percent respectively but only 6.6 and 4.0 percent of the State employment service.

Spanish-speaking Americans have the same problem. In Texas where Mexican Americans form 14.7 percent of the population they are represented by only 8.8 percent of the employees in the State employment service.

Now I know some people are going to say we are not going to play the numbers game. I am not playing any games either, but numbers are important. They indicate a pattern, a pattern that this committee must be aware of before it turns over all our manpower programs to the States.

I stressed the point that I was a black urban representative for a very specific reason. Under the administration approach the cities will be at a tremendous disadvantage.

In spite of the "Pass-Through" features the cities will be at the mercy of the State governments with regard to the amount of the funds they will receive and the manner in which they will be disbursed.

In a long colloquy with Senator Nelson, Secretary Shultz explained that a mayor could appeal his case to the Secretary of Labor and that the Secretary did have the power to override the Governor if necessary.

Judging from the past record in overrides with regard to the OEO program I just don't see this happening very often. I doubt very much if the administration would override one of its Republican Governors and they would shrink even at the thought of overriding a southern Governor.

What we need is not to add another layer of bureaucracy by turning our manpower program over to the States but rather to consolidate and expand the manpower programs under the Department of Labor.

This is why I am supporting so strongly the O'Hara legislation. We need more commitment to and emphasis on not only job training but also to job creation.

In the last couple of evenings CBS news has begun a series of programs on the terrible problems facing American citizens in the health field. The same pattern repeats itself in many areas of the public service sector. Our schools, libraries, police departments, sanitation departments, recreational and park departments, day care centers, and many others are desperately in need of additional man

power.

These are not make work jobs but services which our citizens want and need. Doesn't it seem absurd in this, the richest of all countries, to have people begging for work on one hand and having vital human services jobs go unfulfilled on the other. We have got to begin to create federally financed jobs in the public service field.

As you know our unemployment rate has not risen to 4.6 percent. This may sound small when we speak of it in terms of percentage points but what it means, gentlemen, is that 3,733,000 people are now out of work.

Just as fractions of a second have a critical effect on the maneuvers of our astronauts in space so also those few percentage points are having a critical effect on the lives of millions of our fellow Americans.

Mr. DANIELS. Mrs. Chisholm, both personally and on behalf of the committee, I want to thank you for a very fine statement and for bringing to our attention the particular data that is set forth in your statement.

You did mention that you support the bill sponsored by our colleague, Mr. O'Hara, H.R. 11620.

Mrs. CHISHOLM. Yes.

Mr. DANIELS. And you are opposed to the decentralization principle set forth in the administration bill.

Mrs. CHISHOLM. Yes. I want it to be clearly stated, that it is very important, not only in terms of job training, which is one of the main factors in this whole question of employment and training, but also the whole question of upward mobility, the whole question of the creation of new jobs, because it is one thing to train persons for employment, and it is another thing for them to have the feeling that they will be able to eventually move on up and out into the economic mainstream of American life, and this is what I am very concerned about. Mr. DANIELS. Our field hearings conducted during the Easter recess showed some glaring deficiencies in our programs, and my colleague, Mr. Scherle, will agree with me that we add to the frustration and anger of the unemployed, particularly those from the ghetto areas, when we train them for jobs and on the completion of the training program there are no jobs available.

Mrs. CHISHOLM. There is one other point I would like to leave you. I don't know if this is at all possible but I have been thinking about this, and I was wondering if in some way there could not be a coordination in terms of sections of this Nation where certain regions of this Nation have certain jobs going begging.

They really need personnel and help, but the training programs in that particular area or that particular region do not prepare the people to go into those jobs which around them are going begging, and I was wondering if there was not a possibility of the coordination of the job training relative to the jobs that are going begging in that particular region, because we are finding this a great deal.

Mr. DANIELS. I think you make a very fine point, and I agree with you that there should be a survey and an evaluation made of the opportunities of the employment, and to encourage the trainees to pursue training in those areas where the need is greatest and where jobs are available.

Mr. SCHERLE. Will the chairman yield?

Mr. DANIELS. I am not going to ask any more questions. I will be happy to recognize the gentleman from Iowa.

Mr. SCHERLE. Mrs. Chisholm, it is a pleasure to have you here before our committee this morning, and to answer your question about job selection, on our field trips out in California we did visit skill centers, in fact, two of them, and we found out that, particularly in the