Mr. FORD. All right. Can you give us some specifics on this idea, when you come back after Mr. Briggs? Somebody must have done some planning that led you to interject that, possible reduction in force as an element. You have very specific ideas about what you will do with respect to the other elements that you have outlined.

Maybe somebody on your staff could get for us, before we finish today, an estimate of what will happen in terms of personnel, if in fact the mandatory provisions do prevail.

Mr. CARDWELL. I have no such plan to offer you, sir.

Mr. FORD. Is it fair to say that you really don't seriously believe that this is going to cause massive unemployment at the Office of Education? Mr. CARDWELL. Sir, I didn't mention the Office of Education. I talked about the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Mr. FORD. Well, presumably, if we are cutting education funds, excuse me, I didn't mean to suggest that is what we were going to do. Mr. CARDWELL. We are not. As a matter of fact, if section 406 were to prevail, we would not be able to deny the Commissioner of Education the appropriations made for salaries and expenses.

Mr. FORD. I asked this because I recently read an account of an administration spokesman advocating that substantial savings could be made in the cost of Government here in Washington if we were to curtail the "extraordinary growth of agencies such as," and the first one he named was the Office of Education. I was just trying to get in a little fishing expedition to see if indeed there was such a nefarious plot.

Mr. CARDWELL. No, sir.

Mr. FORD. But you have reassured me.

Mr. CARDWELL. Let me reassure you on one more point.

I know a good bit about the status of the Department salaries and expenses, and the Office of Education is understaffed and underfunded in that area. Our Department has for quite a while tried to gain additional administrative support for the Office of Education, and I would be less than frank if I didn't say to you that one reason we have been unable to do this is that the educational community hasn't supported those proposals, coming from our Department.

Mr. FORD. There is legislation pending now to raise the Commissioner to cabinet level. Unfortunately this legislation was no assigned to this committee. We are trying to find a way to make the Commissioner of Education a Cabinet-level position, and I don't know whether we can do it, but we might wake a lot of people up to the importance of education.

Chairman PERKINS. Come around.

I intend for you gentlemen just to remain in your seat.

Come around, Mr. Briggs, and bring your assistant with you.

Superintendent Briggs, it is a great pleasure for me to again welcome you here before the committee.

You have been so faithful to assist the committee on so many different occasions, your face has become very familiar to all of us.

I note from your testimony when we were conducting our oversight hearings a few months ago that you stated that you really needed a hundred percent more funding than you received in fiscal 1969, fiscal 1970, or fiscal 1971.

I would like for you to tell the committee just what has happened to your school system in view of all the uncertainties that have taken place, and in view of the lack of decisionmaking from the Office of Education within the past few months.

Go ahead and tell the committee has this affected the efficiency of your school operation.

STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL BRIGGS, CITY SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT, CITY OF CLEVELAND, OHIO, ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. CAMILLA BROWN

Mr. BRIGGS. Yes, sir.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is a real pleasure to be with you again, particularly since you have

Chairman PERKINS. See if that microphone is on, there.

Mr. BRIGGS (continuing). Particularly since you have on your committee the distinguished Congressman from the city of Cleveland. Chairman PERKINS. Excuse me.

I want to ask Mr. Stokes: Do you have an opening statement here that you want to make?

Mr. STOKES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would certainly like to thank the chairman of our committee for having extended an invitation to one of America's most distinguished educators. Dr. Paul Briggs, of course, comes from my own congressional district, and we are very proud of him.

Just as our chairman has already stated, he has on many occasions provided this particular committee the advantage of his expertise in the field of education, particularly with reference to the outstanding job which he does in the city of Cleveland, which we feel makes him one of the top educators in this Nation.

Accompanying Dr. Briggs this morning, Mr. Chairman, is Mrs. Camilla Brown, who is administrative assistant to the superintendent of schools in the city of Cleveland, and is a very able and competent, cool administrator herself. I take great pleasure in having this oppor tunity to welcome both of them to your committee.

Chairman PERKINS. I wish to concur in that statement.

Go ahead.

Mr. BRIGGS. Thank you.

I have heard several references to the real world here this morning, and I want to assure you that we also think that we represent the real world, because we represent the world where the children are. We represent the world of reality, when it comes to setting up programs and getting them off the ground, and attempting to do a job.

And I think that in this whole complex situation, I would be the first to pay tribute to the distinguished individuals here from HEW, because we do get good cooperation from their office.

However, some things have happened in our big cities, some serious things, some things that really have threatened education, since I appeared before your committee just a few months ago.

We find that

Chairman PERKINS. Can you get that microphone directly in front of you? See if it is on, there. It may not be working. Go ahead.

Mr. BRIGGS. We find that the local tax valuations have not kept pace with inflation. They have created a real problem since I appeared here previously.

The city of Cleveland has lost in this fiscal year $7 million of operational money that it had budgeted. I hate to admit that we opened school last month with 666 fewer teachers than what we had at the beginning of fiscal 1970 in January, and while this is happening, we look at our tax base and find, since 1962, only a 2.2 increase in the local tax base, while in the suburban areas around the city there has been over a 35-percent increase.

So I say this afternoon to this committee, this is no time to take a conservative view of Federal appropriations for your cities, because your cities are in real deep trouble.

More has happened than just the erosion of a local tax base in our cities.

For example, Federal housing, that we are all very much in favor of, the kind of money we are getting from Federal housing has also eroded, in lieu of taxation. We have dropped from $25 per child to $19 per child this year. This is all we get per child to educate a child out of Federal housing.

In our situation, we have 8,670 such children, only $19 per child. of Federal money in lieu of taxation on that Federal housing.

Some day something is going to have to be done about this, as we approach our responsibilities in Federal housing. I am all for Federal housing-do not misunderstand me-but what I am saying this morning is that we have not only experienced a cutback in Federal taxation of $7 million this year, but even our Federal housing share has been rut drastically.

Millage failures, election failures, are occurring all over the country, ut the State of Ohio is experiencing perhaps the most critical. Ohio is the one State that has more cities than any of the other States, and it is in our cities, and around our cities that we are experiencing the big turndown.

Cincinnati, last week, better than 2 to 1, two suburbs last week ground Cleveland, over a 90-percent turndown, in the last 3 months in all tax and millage levies in our State.

We are approaching a crisis, in a situation that has created a probem that I don't know how we can actually handle. It would appear to me that a city that has increased its taxation for schools in 6 years by 100 percent, and has three more tax issues on the ballot next month, not a city that is avoiding its responsibility.

Now, I come to you today to say that we need full funding. We need an opportunity to give the underprivileged child of the city the kind of an education that he has not had to date.

Uncertainty of funding is one of the things that has been giving great concern. We are hopeful that there will be full funding. However, information that we have had to date would indicate that while He received approximately $191 per welfare child last year, it will eclose to $161 this year.

But I am encouraged from the testimony I hear this morning that ould indicate that this will be increased.

As I look at the statistics of the city, I find some concerns that nght to perhaps scare most of us.

In 1965, the public and nonpublic enrollment of the city of Cleveland was 198,000. In 1970, it had dropped to 180,000, but the number of children from welfare had increased from 27,000 to 43,000, or, in other words 11 percent of the total up to 23 percent. This is just 3 years a hundred percent increase in the children coming from welfare homes. And when we take a look at a 15-year period, we find that the increase from welfare homes has gone up 815 percent.

And I would say to this committee today, our large cities are in danger of becoming the concentration points for the poor. We have built around our cities suburban areas that are affluent, and for some reason, as people have rushed out of the city, we have not allowed the poor to escape in like manner. We have designed public housing so that it has remained within the city, and not outside of the city. The poor must stay in the city.

And with an 830 percent increase in 15 years of children from welfare families, we are in real deep trouble. And I assure you that full funding is not only desirable, but it is necessary.

I would state again, as I did a few months ago, the city of Cleveland is ready and is able and could very easily use double the amount of Federal funding for education, and if we double Federal funding for education, we would not yet bring the expenditure per child in the city of Cleveland to the expenditure of the most affluent suburb around Cleveland, and until we reach that position, we are not going to be out of trouble.

Another indication of the kind of trouble we are in, as you look at the welfare expenditures for our city, in 1961 it was $36 million. in 1963 $39 million, in 1965 $44 million, 1967 $57 million, 1969 $77 million, and until today, that city where the children represent 7 percent of the total population of the State, has 30 percent of all the welfare children of the State of Ohio.

The need is here. It is great. When our need is the greatest, we are finding that our tax take is beginning to erode. We are also finding, at the same time, an increasing amount of difficulty in going to the public for more local funds.

So I come before this committee again, reiterating our position of great need, and also I would like to say that at this moment, when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act really seems to be paying off, this is no time to think in any terms other than increasing the expenditures, particularly for the poor of our cities.

I looked this fall at those who graduated last spring in our fire inner city high schools, and I found last week that 93 percent of those wanting jobs had been placed on jobs, as a result of Federal moneys that have been used on job placement. I find that those youngsters that have been so placed on jobs are making this year approximately $5 million. This is new money, going into the inner city, and going into the ghetto.

I find also that this fall we have a 100-percent increase in number of children from the inner city going to college, as compared to only years ago, and this is a tribute in the Federal moneys.

And when we look at the amount of our payroll that is now going to assist black people, I was interested to learn only Friday of last week that of our payroll, approxmiately $3 million per month goes to black individuals. This is building a new kind of support that we have not

had. Much of this has come from Federal funds that are concentrated in the areas of highest poverty.

I have nothing but the greatest respect for the administration of the programs, and for the people we work with.

But I would say to this committee, the amount of money that is being made available for the children of poverty in our cities is not yet enough to gain, to build the kind of program necessary to meet the aspirations that the people have for the program.

Thank you.

Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you on such an outstanding statement. I get the same viewpoint from the rural superintendents that I have the opportunity to associate with every weekend.

Later on it will be the purpose of the committee to conduct some regional oversight hearings. I don't know where we will conduct them, either Cincinnati or Huntington, W. Va., to reach the Midwest area. And I would like for you to continue your study of the effectiveness of title I, Elementary-Secondary Act, along the lines that you mentioned here before the committee today.

Aside from that, you mention that you need at least twice the amount of funding that you are presently receiving to do this job. Now let's just take an actual case. We appropriated this year, the Congress stated, that the Office of Education shall spend $1,500 million for title I. You are telling the committee that you have some reservations and experience some great concern about uncertainties.

I wish you would elaborate just a little more along that line, Superintendent Briggs.

Mr. BRIGGS. Yes. I think the democratic process of getting laws passed, getting funding, going through the various committees, and then finally the administration of them and the guidelines and the coordination between the Federal Government, the State government, and the local government at best creates uncertainty.

I do like I would like to think that we would have more leadtime than what we have had. We did our hiring in anticipation of funding. I have found as I have grown older that maybe sometimes we can guess where we are going to be. And rather than to wait until programs are completely jelled and rigid and then go out and do our hiring, sometimes we have proceeded with some of our Federal hiring. And this has paid off.

But it does give you anxious moments, because you wonder-you are never quite sure-and I am not sure that all of my colleagues would know what we have done in Cleveland. And that is

Chairman PERKINS. Take a chance.

Mr. BRIGGS. Take a chance. I hate to use the word "gamble" in these halls. But, nevertheless, I am afraid that that is what we have done from time to time.

Chairman PERKINS. And you are telling this committee that anything less than full funding, to put it bluntly, will be more or less disastrous to your school system.

Mr. BRIGGS. This is right. You see, the total funding that we will get this year is less than the money we have lost within the last 3 months from an erosion of the tax base in the city of Cleveland.

One example, the Penn Central case, we were supposed to get from the Penn Central Railway Co. this year $430,000 in taxes. You know