1

Senator BYRNES. I think you preferred to do it instead of letting the Congress do it. It did not make any difference to me if you accomplished the object.

Mr. WILLIAMS. We have tried our best.

Senator BYRNES. You have gotten it to 22.8?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.

Senator BYRNES. And the only other question I wanted to ask will be answered if you will put in the table that Senator Russell was talking about.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I will be very glad to do that.

Senator OVERTON. I want to ask now about direct relief, what the opportunities are in the States and cities and local communities? Can you enlighten us as to why they did not think of their employables? Mr. WILLIAMS. Why they had direct relief, you mean, rather than a work program?

Senator ÖVERTON. Yes; as over against the work program.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Until the present emergency, most of the cases on local relief were not employable. Also, local facilities for administering direct relief already existed, having been organized under the F. E. R. A., but it would be a difficult undertaking for the localities to organize and operate individual work programs. As compared with organizing and conducting a direct relief program, it is much more difficult to do locally.

Senator OVERTON. Well, the local communities could pay the work program for the W. P. A.?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, we require local agencies to supply funds and materials

Senator OVERTON. To make contributions?

Mr. WILLIAMS. To make contributions; but it ought to be said that the Federal Government does organize and administer the program. I think that the administrative problems involved are the reasons why communities generally have not undertaken local work programs for their employables.

Senator HALE. Mr. Williams, the average rate you pay on work relief is about $65 a month?

Mr. WILLIAMS. The average full-time monthly earnings rate is about $58. Actual earnings per worker averaged about $56 per month, because of voluntary lost time, and so forth.

Senator HALE. About $58?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; expenditures for materials and other nonlabor items on work projects average about $7.50 per worker per month.

Senator HALE. It brings it up to $63 or $64.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; project expenditures averaged $63.50 per worker per month during the last 6 months of 1937. If administrative costs are included, the total expenditure per worker per month averaged $66.

Senator ADAMS. Your statement in the House was that the average total cost was about $66.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes; I believe that the total cost per worker during the last 5 months of this fiscal year will be approximately $65 per man per month.

Senator HALE. Does that include material and equipment?

Mr. WILLIAMS. It includes everything that the Federal Government puts in.

Senator HALE. Administrative and everything?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; the over-all figure.

Senator HALE. And the average direct relief is somewhere around $30? It is less than half.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think that is the average figure obtained by dividing the total number of cases receiving any relief into the total amount of aid extended. Of course the figures aren't comparable to work program costs because many relief families are not completely dependent, but receive only enough aid to supplement other resources. Many others need assistance only at intermittent periods, but they are all counted as relief cases, regardless of the extent of their dependency. A W. P. A. worker, on the other hand, receives a regular monthly wage for the work he performs. Furthermore, a work program produces physical results which constitute a definite contribution to the national wealth.

Senator TOWNSEND. Mr. Williams, I think we gathered the information from some source that a man who had been employed on W. P. A. and then was taken over by industry and then he again lost his job and came back was on the preferred list. Is that correct? Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; that is right.

Senator TOWNSEND. Then he takes the job of some fellow who is there, if you cannot work it out any other way?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; we went so far as to say we would give him his job even if it meant dropping someone else. We cannot penalize workers for accepting private jobs, if they later lose those jobs through no fault of their own.

Senator NYE. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?

Senator ADAMS. Yes, Mr. Nye.

Senator NYE. Have any studies been made, Mr. Williams, to indicate how much new wealth has been created by reason of work programs?

Mr. WILLIAMS. We have gone into that but it is difficult to determine. We are putting in the record the physical accomplishments of the program.

Senator MCKELLAR. I wish you would put it in the record.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I have a statement that goes into it very fully. Senator NYE. Well, the fact that it costs more to afford a family relief on a W. P. A. project than by direct relief does not mean that the difference in the cost is entire loss?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No, sir. It could not possibly be interpreted as such. We have operated 150,000 projects; we have improved 146,000 miles of road; we have built 44,000 miles of new road, and we have built 19,000 new bridges. I won't take up the time of the committee to read all of what has been done on other types of projects.

I would like to refer now to the statement I have only partially completed. I was up to the point of discussing the need for expanding the W. P. A. rolls. Here are data for each of 90 cities in a table which I am submitting for the record.

(The data referred to above are as follows:)

TABLE 4.- -Number of cases and amount of obligations incurred for general relief in 90 urban areas 1

1 Figures for some of the urban areas are preliminary or estimated by the State.

2 Includes data for entire county in which city is located.

3 Data not available.

TABLE 4.-Number of cases and amount of obligations incurred for general relief in 90 urban areas- -Continued

Senator HALE. Are you giving all of the 90 cities? I do not think the House record includes them all.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; they are in that record.

Large numbers of needy employable persons can be found in all the cities and towns throughout the country. Our investigators and State administrators report a growing pressure to increase local W. P. A. employment. For instance, in Cleveland there are some 27,000 needy employables who are assignable to the W. P. A. In St. Louis, 7,200 needy persons are available for immediate assignIn Boston and San Francisco the W. P. A. program would

ment.

have to increase 60 percent to absorb the needy employables assignable to jobs. In Atlanta an increase of 41 percent would be necessary; in Pittsburgh, 65 percent; in New Orleans, 24 percent.

The figures cited above do not indicate the true seriousness of the problem because many cities are turning relief applicants away because of a shortage of funds.

Right along that line, Senator Russell, we have studied the recent increases in W. P. A. employment, and a very large proportion of the increases went to small communities and rural sections. A good proportion of the 350,000 increase went into the smaller towns and the open country.

Senator RUSSELL. From what little I know about it, it seems to me that the smaller towns had closed down or restricted their operations to a greater degree than those in the larger cities.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, that would be due to the seasonal factor.
Senator RUSSELL. I was quite interested in that, too.

Mr. WILLIAMS. The proposed increase in the W. P. A. program to 2,500,000 will mean that hard-pressed cities would then be able to accept many of the needy families now being turned away. We also know that relief standards are being reduced all over the country in an effort to spread the available funds as widely as possible. In the counties in the cotton belt, for instance, average relief benefits are as low as $3.76 a month per family. Averages of $4, $5, and $6 are common. In Cleveland, only 10 cents a month per case can be allowed for clothing, and food allowances have been cut. In St. Louis almost no gas and electricity and only half the needed fuel are given. And half of the needy applicants are being turned away.

Local governments are being pressed to provide funds for the present relief crisis. Local contributions have increased by two and one-half times during the past 5 years for relief and work relief. In 1933 the cities and States spent $409,000,000; in 1934, $565,000,000; in 1935, $614,000,000; in 1936, $872,000,000; and in 1937, $1,013,000,000. These expenditures include direct relief, work relief, public assistance in the forms of old-age assistance and aid to dependent children, and the local contributions to the Civil Works Administration and the Works Progress Administration.

But the financial ability of the communities is limited-many are in extremely difficult straits. The favorable local revenue situation of the last several years has taken a turn for the worse.

The larger cities of the country, with few exceptions, have been unable to develop major sources of revenue to supplement the general property tax. Some State governments, with a view to compensating for deficiencies in local revenues, have undertaken to meet a portion of relief and welfare costs, but State funds appropriated for these purposes are being spent faster than was anticipated and are unlikely to be sufficient to meet increased requirements at this time. Many of the country's largest cities are unprepared to meet the heavy relief costs being imposed upon them. Some have not yet emerged from extended periods of deficit operations; others again face the prospect of spending more than their income.

Detroit's relief appropriation for the fiscal year ending next June 30 already is exhausted and city officials have asked the State for additional assistance. Little remains, however, of the current Michigan relief appropriation and early in March the State may have to draw