Page images
PDF
EPUB

In other words, we have a housemother and housefather just like a large family and we try to give them home living rather than institutionalized living.

Mr. McCORMACK. What is your position, Mr. Lund, on these bills, for the record ?

Mr. LUND. I think it is—as we have previously stated, I honestly believe that we do not as yet have enough information relating to the total availability of property, and if I can come back just for a moment to the fire-fighting equipment.

Now there are 19 companies in Fairfax and you take the counties around and you multiply that out by the counties in these United States and you would come up with requirements of equipment that are so excessive that we think that you would spread it to a point where the program would lose its real value to any given unit.

We did consider very carefully this matter of the agencies for which Miss Colborn has spoken and we have tried to work with them.

In that area again it is our judgment that one of these times we may come along with a recommendation of some expansion but frankly we just do not have enough knowledge of the quantities to be generated, and knowing the needs of schools, we think our position is sound.

Mr. McCORMACK. When will you have the knowledge!
Mr. LUND. Well, that is a very difficult question to answer, sir.
Mr. McCORMACK. I understand.
Mr. Lund. We are trying and studying it constantly.
I cannot answer specifically.

Mr. McCORMACK. Would you have it next January? I think I will be here next January. I have no opposition, but I think I will be here; I hope so.

Mr. LUND. We hope you will.
Mr. McCORMACK. Well, thank you.

Mr. Lund. We hope you will. The only thing we really can say is we are constantly trying to review and study the problem in relation to that which becomes available.

We are the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. We feel our major responsibility is to service those units, frankly, and if you spread this program too widely no one gets direct benefit. Let's take generators for fire departments. Currently we have

. all kinds of orders for hospitals, and lives have been saved because we have had this equipment in hospitals.

Now, which is of the greater value? I am not sure that my judgment is good enough to say that it should be in the local fire department or in the local hospital.

Mr. McCORMACK. Would that not get down to the State level, then to the State directors to determine?

Mr. LUND. Yes, it goes to the State.

Mr. McCORMACK. It has to go back as a matter of administration then and that could be on the State level?

Mr. Lund. Yes, sir. It would have to be under the existing procedure.

But we have so many unmet needs yet in the schools and hospitals that we feel that because of their situation we are rendering a greater

[ocr errors]

overall service to society and to the citizens of this country by adhering to the policy currently that we have for some little time further.

Mr. McCORMACK. Of course, I might just say it all depends on how effectively the several States cooperate, too?

Mr. LUND. That is correct; yes, sir.
Mr. McCORMACK. They have a burden.

Mr. LUND. A good many of the States are very much concerned about that burden of cost and distribution, the cost of some of this equipment Mr. McCORMACK. My question to you was from another angle.

Some of the States are getting property, certainly the acquisition value of which would save them tremendous sums of money.

We know what they have received from year to year, we know that they have received practically within the past few months countless millions of dollars in acquisition which they would have to paythey would have to pay the full value if they had to go out and get it.

So if they establish a State organization and give these funds to the State director, to go to the various camps and so forth, it is all inuring to the benefit of institutions within the State.

Mr. LUND. That is correct.
Mr. McCORMACK. It is all serving a public good.

The very theory upon which we passed the law in the main was rather than sell this usable surplus property for anywhere from 6 to 10 cents on the acquisition dollar it was serving more public good by letting certain institutions obtain it.

But there are certain costs in connection with that.

Mr. LUND. One other thing very frequently overlooked in relation to your educational program is this: Property utilization has a training value. This is not new- -a very small portion of it is new;

it
goes

to vocational schools and is rebuilt and it has the elements of teaching youngsters to reuse material and equipment, and we think that is worthwhile.

A good many of these other organizations are not so established so as to be able to put in the cost of rehabilitation. The educational feature of this would be lost to many children if the schools were denied and property spread too thin.

Mr. McCORMACK. You said you are surveying it and studying it and I was wondering when you might have a report. Of course, that has been going on for some time now. We had it, of course, 2 years ago. Mr. LUND. We forwarded our report on that to the committee.

Mr. McCORMACK. Well, the report is implemented by your report on the different bills so that shows what the report was.

I am not questioning; I know the difficulties and I know the history.

If you broaden it too much, it results, as I referred to earlier in the hearing, to abuses and then we have public scandals.

We had it before in the early fifties, you know going back under the old law and certain abuses in effect defeated the purpose of the law, the Surplus Property Act, and where certain abuses were made, it aroused public opinion. Somebody got some property and then sold it to contractors, you know, to use for building roads, a few, not all, but that is the thing that hits the country and there is a reaction which

a

goes against the whole law, and that is all involved because we know that through experience.

There is no questioning of any of the worthy objectives and the fine intentions but we know what human nature is here and there.

Something happens and then the whole plan, the whole program is affected adversely.

But the States could cooperate more, some of the States could cooperate more.

Mr. LUND. Yes, sir.

Mr. McCORMACK. That is right, and get an awful lot more of surplus property.

Mr. LUND. Yes.

Mr. McCORMACK. Certainly the YMCA would qualify, if the Boy Scouts qualified on the Secretary of Defense level.

Would you not think so? Mr. LUND. In my judgment, yes. Mr. McCORMACK. The YMCA would qualify, and a number of others, and do you agree with me they ought to concentrate their efforts in that direction to see what the results are ?

Mr. LUND. Yes, I have one concern if I am going to be consistent with the committee, and that is this, and in my own thinking, that if the Department of Defense, and I do not think we would have any objection if it was in the wisdom of the committee that they should run this program

Mr. McCORMACK. Of course I am not agreeing with the action of the Department of Defense, I want the record to show that, the action taken in some of these cases.

Mr. LUND. I was trying to point out if we followed that to a logical conclusion, that the health institutions and the educational institutions of this country would soon be on not only the low list on priority, but would be on the list without getting property.

Mr. McCORMACK. No question about it.
Then we would have to try to put them above the others.
Mr. LUND. That is right.

Mr. McCORMACK. Certainly, for educational activities that are of special interest to the armed services, that would be one thing.

Then Public Law 152 of the 81st Congress, went further and said: such as maritime academies or military, naval, Air Force, or Coast Guard preparatory schools.

We indicated clearly to them what the intent of Congress was, I thought we had.

Mr. LUND. There is a potential here that
Mr. McCORMACK. But they have made the decision now.
Mr. Lund. That is right.
Mr. McCORMACK. And they have got to accept the consequences.

. Go ahead, Mr. Lund.

Mr. Lund. If we had, again, full knowledge of this total picture and there was this balance, then I feel confident that our Department would not be so concerned about some expansion.

But we have not the knowledge of the totals of defense, and therefore, it would be difficult, you see, for us to make a total evaluation on the total front.

We are confined primarily to what the law gives to us, in relation to that and in relation to the big demands now in shortage areaswe have a hundred thousand requests from schools for machine tools and allied equipment and our guess is we will have this year approximately 5,600 to deliver.

Now I could give you other illustrations in other areas.

The other people can contend that there are not items of contest, that they would take other things.

That is true to a degree, but as yet we do not know to what degree, and by continuing to study this, evaluating it and find what surplus property is being generated, we are hopeful that in the future we will be able on a basis of facts to make a more intelligent presentation to this committee, but we are reluctant now to enter into something unknown and risk the loss of a program that today is of real significance to the people of this country.

Mr. McCORMACK. Ask those questions.

Mr. WARD. I wanted to ask, Mr. Lund, if the bottleneck then does not develop around the fact that the staff time in Health, Education, and Welfare and General Services Administration, and the Department of Defense and in the States also becomes a commodity, so to speak.

Mr. LUND. That is true. That is perfectly correct.
Mr. McCORMACK. Anything further?
Mr. WARD. No more questions.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Currie from the Bureau of the Budget is here, Mr. James D. Currie.

Mr. CURRIE. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCORMACK. What is your position on these bills ?
What is the position of the Bureau of the Budget?

STATEMENT OF JAMES D. CURRIE, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET

Mr. CURRIE. Mr. Chairman, I am authorized by the Bureau of the Budget to listen rather than to speak.

I will just say we have consistently opposed these bills and I think my answer would be in the reports that we have made in the committee.

Mr. McCORMACK. Of course the reports will all be made a part of the record.

(The material is as follows:)

(H. R. 242, H. R. 737, H. R. 2504, H. R. 4007, H. R. 5448, H. R. 5451, H. R. 5460, H. R. 5470, H. R. 6537 follow; H. R. 10377 appears on p. 6.)

[H, R. 242, 85th Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to

permit the donation of surplus property to certain community organizations Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the first sentence of paragraph (1) of section 203 (j) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended (40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (j)), is amended by

(1) striking out “or” immediately after “public health,”; and

(2) inserting immediately after "civil defense,” the following: “or for the purposes of organizations such as volunteer fire departments and volunteer rescue or life-saving squads, which perform community services that would be performed by the State, or its political subdivisions, if not performed by such organizations,”.

[ocr errors]

SEC. 2. (a) The first sentence of paragraph (3) of such section 203 (j) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended (40 U.S.C., sec. 484 (j)), is amended by

(1) inserting immediately after “public health," the following: "or for the purposes of organizations such as volunteer fire departments and volunteer rescue or life-saving squads, which perform community services that would be performed by the State, or its political subdivisions, if not performed by such organizations," ;

(2) striking out “and" immediately preceding “(B)”; and

(3) striking out the period at the end thereof and inserting the following: ", and (C) organizations such as volunteer fire departments and volunteer rescue or life-saving squads, which perform community services which would be performed by the State, or its political subdivisions, if not performed by such organizations, and are exempt from taxation under section 501 (c) of

the Internal Revenue Code of 1954." (b) The second sentence of paragraph (3) of such section 203 (j) is amended by inserting “, or for the purposes of the organizations referred to in clause (C) of the preceding sentence,” immediately after “public health purposes”.

[H. R. 737, 85th Cong., 1st sess.)

A BILL To amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to

permit the disposal of certain surplus property to State defense forces Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) paragraph (1) of section 203 (j) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U. S. C. 484) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sentence: “Under such regulations as he may prescribe, the Administrator may donate to State defense forces maintained pursuant to the Act approved August 11, 1955 (64 Stat. 1072; 32 U. S. C. 194) uniforms, clothing, equipment, materials, and other supplies under the control of the Department of Defense which have been (1) determined to be surplus property, and (2) determined pursuant to paragraph (3) of this subsection to be usable and necessary for such forces.”

(b) The first section of paragraph (3) of such section is amended by inserting, immediately after the words “preparatory schools” a comma and the following: “or for State defense forces maintained pursuant to the Act approved August 11, 1955 (64 Stat. 1072; 32 U. S. C. 194)".

(c) The second sentence of paragraph (3) of such section is amended by striking out the word “educational".

(H. R. 2504, 85th Cong., 1st sess.) A BILL To provide that Government surplus property may be donated to 4-H Clubs for

the construction, equipment, and operation of camps and centers Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 203 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (40 U. S. C., sec. 484) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

“(m) (1) Under such regulations as he may prescribe, the Administrator is authorized in his discretion to donate to 4H Clubs without cost (except for costs of care and handling) such equipment, materials, or other supplies under the control of any executive agency as shall have been determined to be surplus prop erty and which shall have been determined under paragraph (2) of this subsection to be usable and necessary for the construction, equipment, and operation of 4-H Club camps and centers.

“(2) Determination whether such surplus property is usable and necessary for the construction, equipment, and operation of PH Club camps and centers shall be made by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, who shall allocate such property on the basis of needs and utilization for transfer by the Administrator to 4-H Clubs."

« PreviousContinue »