TITLE I. DECLARATION OF NATIONAL HOUSING POLICY We endorse this title as it stands. We would like to suggest, however, that the need for Federal action in a field that many citizens still consider to be a purely local activity could have been more strongly emphasized. As we see it, the need for Federal participation in housing matters arises from three considerations: 1. Neither private enterprise nor the municipalities can solve urban housing and redevelopment problems without Federal assistance. 2. The process of urban redevelopment can be made of enormous importance to the national economy in smoothing out the sharp ups and downs of the business cycle; but the rebuilding of our American cities cannot serve this essential purpose unless it is coordinated with and forms a part of a Federal program. It is this factor, as well as the needs of the cities, which justifies the Federal loans and grants that will be required. 3. Several factors in our present housing emergency, such as displacement of population and curtailment of normal building for several years, were the direct result of the war. It is, therefore, reasonable that the Federal Government should aid the cities and private enterprise to meet these special problems. TITLE II. NATIONAL HOUSING COMMISSION We approve the effort to coordinate Government agencies having to do with home finance, home building, and public housing by means of a Commission instead of a consolidated National Housing Agency. We believe, however, that the proposed Commission could function more effectively if it consisted of five members, as follows: The Administrator, the Federal Home Loan Bank Administrator, the Federal Housing Administrator, the Federal Public Housing Administrator, and the Federal Urban Redevelopment Administrator. (See comment on title III.) TITLE III. FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK ADMINISTRATION, FEDERAL HOUSING We approve of this title except that we believe the urban redevelopment, as described under title VIII, should have a separate administration and administrator on an equal footing with the three administrations now described in this title. We approve this title. TITLE IV. HOUSING RESEARCH TITLE V. EXISTING HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL HOUSING AIDS As architects we do not claim any special competence to pass on many of the detailed provisions of this title. We do not have any specific objection to this title. TITLE VI. HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL HOUSING FOR FAMILIES OF LOWER INCOME While we recognize the housing needs of families in lower-income groups, we do not believe that these needs in themselves justify a departure from financial procedures described under title V. The assumptions made in this title appear to us to be unrealistic and difficult to justify on the basis of sound mortgage practice. We favor the deletion of this entire title VI. TITLE VII. YIELD INSURANCE FOR RENTAL HOUSING We approve this title VII. Yield insurance constitutes a new departure in financial procedures and one which we believe is worth trying. It may be doubted whether the form of this type of insurance will be sufficiently attractive to investors to result in any substantial volume of work. Insofar as it is used, however, it would seem to involve a very small risk on the part of the Federal Government as insurer. We recommend the deletion of section 702. We see no reason for any differentiation in eligibility requirements from the requirements established for FHA insured mortgages. TITLE VIII. LAND ASSEMBLY AND PREPARATION FOR REDEVELOPMENT In general, we recommend the approval of this title VIII, subject to the following comment: That is, from the point of view of the architects, the most important title in the bill at least in its long-range implications. If a rational procedure can be devised for the gradual and methodical rebuilding of our cities, it will go a long way toward curing the ills of the construction industry, while at the same time providing good housing for all income groups and helping to avoid excessive fluctuations in our national prosperity. The present title VIII is not that kind of a program, but it is a step in the right direction-perhaps as great a step as we should take at this time, provided that we realize its limitations. This title does not require urban planning to be done on a metropolitan area basis as a prerequisite to Federal loans and grants. This question will have to be faced before we can speak of real city planning in America, but it is a step that we need not take now as long as we are under no illusions concerning the type of planning we are apt to get at this time. Section 802 (2) permits the selling or leasing of the land assembled by the public agency. We believe that urban land, once acquired for redevelopment by a local public agency, should not be sold, but should be leased for a period of approximately 50 years. Obsolescence and blight are functions of age and the new project of today will some day require rebuilding in order to be in keeping with the progress of our civilization. When that time comes it would be a pity to burden either the municipal or Federal Government with the cost of again acquiring the land and its obsolete buildings as a prerequisite to a second redevelopment. We strongly urge that no urban land acquired by a local public agency through the use of Federal loans or grants be allowed to be sold. We fully recognize the need for Federal aid in addition to low-interest loans. We believe, however, that it would be simpler and better to make direct grants for this purpose rather than to rely on Federal annual contributions in accordance with a complicated formula. The amounts provided in the bill for loans and contributions are insufficient to justify any of our large cities in embarking on a comprehensive urban redevelopment program. They appear to be sufficient, however, for exploratory projects which will permit them to gain needed experience before attempting a more ambitious program. We recommend the deletion of the word "temporary" in the first line of section 802 (3). There should be no inference in the bill that new redevelopment projects would be occupied by the original tenants or by tenants in the same income group. We should like to see section 810 deleted as well as all similar clauses in presently existing housing legislation. We do not feel that construction labor requires any more protection by the Federal Government than any other type of labor. We are therefore of the opinion that prevailing rates of wage clauses should not be included in any housing legislation. The detailed reports required under paragraph (3) of section 810 add to the cost of doing business and to the irritation of contractors. This paragraph (3) should be deleted even if paragraphs (1) and (2) are retained. TITLE IX. URBAN LOW-RENT HOUSING We recommend the approval of this title IX. We do not believe that it will be possible to meet the housing needs of veterans through private enterprise exclusively. The housing supply will, for a long time, remain too restricted to meet veterans' housing needs indirectly as a result of building housing for those who can afford it at present prices. Many of us believe that it may ultimately be possible, through a careful long-range program for urban reconstruction, to provide decent housing for families of all income groups without resorting to public housing. Pending agreement on and adoption of such a program, however, the majority opinion of the American Institute of Architects definitely favors a continuation of our public housing policies as set forth in title IX. We wish especially to commend the provisions of section 909. We seriously question the possibility of producing new housing under the cost limitations contained in this title. Under present conditions each of the cost limitations in section 903 should be increased by $250. Furthermore, we see no more reason for differentiating between costs in large and small cities in the case of public housing than there is in the case of private housing under FHA-insured loans. TITLE X. FARM HOUSING We have no comment on this title. TITLE XI. RURAL NONFARM HOUSING We approve this title XI. TITLE XII. DISPOSITION OF PERMANENTLY FEDERALLY OWNED HOUSING We approve this title XII. TITLE XIII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS We have no comment on this title XIII. GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS, Hon. CHARLES TOBEY, Chairman, Banking and Currency Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: Attached is a statement on S. 866 which I shall appreciate very much having included in the record of hearings on this bill held by the Banking and Currency Committee. Thank you in advance for this courtesy. Cordially yours, Mrs. LAFELL DICKINSON, President. STATEMENT FROM MRS. LAFELL DICKINSON, PRESIDENT, GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS The General Federation of Women's Clubs-an organization with a membership of 3,000,000 women-has long been concerned with the inadequacy of the Nation's housing, particularly for low-income groups-an inadequacy which, since the end of World War II, has constituted a national emergency. We, therefore, endorse the principles of S. 866, insofar as they give active support and aid to housing programs designed to provide adequate homes for illhoused families and benefit all groups of the community. These principles are in accord with the following resolution adopted by the General Federation of Women's Clubs in national convention: "Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs urges the State federations and clubs to study local housing needs and programs, to give active support and aid to housing programs designed to provide adequate homes for illhoused families and benefit all groups of the community, and to seek the inclusion of representative women on State and local housing authorities." The principles embodied in S. 866 are in accord with our belief that private enterprise should do the bulk of the housing job, with public housing only supplementing when it is necessary to assure that all families may eventually have a decent home in which to rear their families. This bill also conforms with another of our basic beliefs, namely, that as much as possible of the responsibility and initiative be left to the local communities, with the Federal Government assisting only to the extent necessary to the carrying out of objectives. The lack of housing for veterans is of utmost consideration to the General Federation of Women's Clubs and we heartily approve the preferences for veterans provided in the bill. Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY, COMMITTEE TO ABOLISH DISCRIMINATION, Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In support of the Taft-Ellender-Wagner housing bill (S. 866), the National CIO Committee To Abolish Discrimination herein goes on record as recommending the early approval of this legislation by the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency. Housing needs dramatized by the present emergency are too critical to be disregarded or treated casually and we urge that the bill be given a high priority on the Senate Calendar. Again we heartily concur in the belief that it is time for Congress to present to the American people a long-range policy and intelligently planned program in the field of housing. As organizations especially concerned with the welfare of workers of all races, we regard the existing condition of blight, deterioration, and overcrowding as factors contributing to excessive rates of disease, social unrest, loss of valuable man-hours of productive labor, and decreased efficiency, as well as adding to racial tensions. It is a matter of fact that families of low-income and racial groups are usually confined to the most run-down and dilapidated sections of our cities and towns-a condition which makes the high incidence of these demoralizing social problems among minorities understandable. Our Nation can ill afford at this time to neglect its responsibility to do everything within its power to provide all segments of its citizenry with the means of securing a wholesome and satisfying life. One of the facilities essential to such a life is healthful environment. Because of these considerations, we support Senate bill 866. We feel that all American people should benefit equally from legislation as comprehensive as this. Consequently, we wish to bring shortcomings in S. 866 to the attention of your committee. To safeguard the interests of the minorities in participating in the program on a basis of equity, we propose the inclusion of: Title I. A statement specifying that all economic and racial groups are to be included in the goal of "a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family, and to develop and redevelop communities so as to advance the growth and wealth of the Nation." Title VII. A statement specifying that the benefits of the yield insurance cover rental housing to be occupied by minority families in its provisions. Title VIII. Protective measures assuring minorities that restrictive covenants and other devices will not be used to exclude them from urban redevelopment projects either as investors or occupants. We are of the opinion that in the absence of clear-cut precise statements assuring the equitable participation of Negroes and other minorities in the several phases of the program, especially those administered by the Federal Housing Administration, there is room for considerable skepticism as to the extent to which minorities will benefit. Minority groups have been long aware of Federal Housing Administration's undemocratic practices of the past and must be given the assurance that the same will not be extended into the future. We have seen neighborhoods which have been economically and racially mixed for years, undemocratically changed as a result of these practices. This increasing stratification of American communities results in racial ghettos and ultimately generates racial divisions and tensions. We are convinced, as stated in our testimony on Senate bill 1592, that this type of administration is disruptive to the American way of life. We feel, therefore, that the time has come for Congress to include specific mandates in the legislation of its intention that these housing programs are to be administered in support of the democratic way of life. In conclusion, we should like to commend Senators Taft, Ellender, and Wagner for their reintroduction of national housing legislation and express the hope that its consideration and passage by the Congress will proceed expeditiously. Sincerely yours, GEORGE L-P WEAVER, Assistant to the President; UTSE-CIO; Director, Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY, UNITED STATES SENATE, Chairman, Banking and Currency Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: Enclosed herewith is a telegram I have just received from Mr. John C. West, president of the University of North Dakota, urging passage of Senate bill No. 866, which is now before your committee. I know that you are giving this legislation every possible consideration. Sincerely yours, MILTON R. YOUNG, United States Senator. GRAND FORKS, N. DAK., March 28, 1947. Senator MILTON YOUNG, Washington, D. O. Pressing need for housing for faculty families here prompts me to urge you to advocate passing of Senate bill 866 now in Banking and Currency Committee. JOHN C. WEST, President, University of North Dakota. UNITED STATES SENATE, March 28, 1947. Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. Dear SENATOR: Enclosed herewith is a telegram I have just received from Mr. John C. West, president of the University of North Dakota in Grand Forks, N. Dak., concerning Senate bill S. 866. The enclosure is self-explanatory, and is being forwarded to you for your consideration and attention. I hope you are well and wish to extend my kind regards and best wishes. WM. LANGER, GRAND FORKS, N. DAK., March 28, 1947. Senator WILLIAM LANGER, Washington, D. C. Pressing need for housing for faculty families here prompts me to urge you to advocate passing of Senate bill 866 now in Banking and Currency Committee. JOHN C. WEST, President, University of North Dakota. TESTIMONY SUBMITTED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN, WASHINGTON, D. C. On behalf of the American Association of University Women, I wish to reaffirm the association's support for the general housing bill which was expressed to this committee last year. The events of the past year in the housing field have made even more apparent the need for an effective, long-range, comprehensive housing program. We regret the delay that has already occurred in launching such a program. The present bill, S. 866, contains the basic features of the measure which we supported last year. Every major section of the bill is essential to a program which will begin to meet the housing needs of American families-financial aids to private enterprise to serve middle-income groups, encouragement for rental housing, assistance to communities for urban redevelopment, public housing for at least a part of the large group for whom private industry has not provided and cannot provide, and steps to improve the housing of rural families. We regret that the provisions for research have been weakened for we regard research |