after all, the funds that we have to match on the Federal side with the States would be cut down to a degree, a great degree.

So far as I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, I think this legislation is something that has been needed and I hope that we can expeditiously act on it in the next few days with the hope that we can get it through the House this year.

Mr. THOMAS. I have one other point that I would like to make. We are also vitally interested in utilization within the Federal Government. We in GSA have taken some rather forward steps to improve that area to where we can attain maximum utilization because when once we can match up a new procurement with something that we have in excess it is money in the taxpayer's pocket. It is a public benefit and means real savings, and we are all taxpayers and interested in that phase of it.

Mr. RIEHLMAN. There is one other statement that I would like to make for the benefit of those from civil defense organizations throughout the United States and that is this: If this becomes law, and the manner in which the equipment will be received and cared for, I think that it is going to be vital and very important that we do not get into the position where we want to get everything that is available and then find that we have surplus piled upon surplus in communities where it is not absolutely necessary and essential to the civil defense program. I have confidence in the people in charge of this program, but I think that a warning is not improper at this time. I say that very sincerely and honestly because I am very much in favor of the program and I want to see what can be done to carry it out. I do think we must be careful in the requests that are made that it is necessary that the equipment be made available for the purpose, and that when it is received that you have the housing, the facilities, to care for it and will not have some of it lying around in the community because then the community, or the people, will say to us, "Well, you have allocated this to this program, they are not utilizing it," and we will get the repercussions from that side.

Mr. KRUEGER. In some communities the Civil Defense Administration will accumulate too much and in others there will not be enough. The distribution would not be right.

Mr. RIEHLMAN. That is something that will have to be worked out through the Administrator and on down the line.

Mr. BROOKS. We want to thank you very much, Mr. Thomas. Prior to concluding, Mr. Malone, I would like to recognize you at this time to introduce any of the civil-defense people that we have not previously recognized.

Mr. MALONE. (Introduces people.)

Now, I would like to answer the last question. Does the gentleman realize that all our cities are at present stockpiling Federal equipment at no expense to the Federal Government? For example, Baltimore has spent $13,000 safeguarding Federal equipment. In Boston I have 20 miles of pipe, 2 garages, steel wire protection, cabinets, and so forth to stockpile engineering equipment for the Federal Government. Every city is at present stockpiling Federal equipment at no expense to the Federal Government. We do know how to stockpile equipment. We have spent money to stockpile that equipment. We do need equipment that you have. We have procedures at the State level for re

ceiving and handling this equipment properly. If we did not we would certainly not ask for it.

Mr. BROOKS. Thank you very much.

Now I would like to recognize at this time Colonel Oats, director for northern Virginia, civil defense.

Now, at this time I would like to put into the record a wire from the national secretary of the American Legion Auxiliary representing nearly 1 million women.

(The telegram referred to is as follows:)

Hon. JACK B. BROOKS,

WASHINGTON, D. C., July 19, 1955.

Chairman, Special Government Activities Subcommittee of House Committee on Government Operations, New House Office Building:

The American Legion Auxiliary representing nearly 1 million women believes every effort should be made to strengthen this Nation's civil-defense program. Favorable consideration of H. R. 7227 would serve this cause by permitting State civil-defense organizations to utilize Federal surplus property. This in turn would substantially contribute to our overall national security. We urgently request your favorable consideration of this measure.

JANE GOULD RISHWORTH,

National Secretary, The American Legion Auxiliary.

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Miles Kennedy, the legislative director of the Legion was going to be here this morning, but he has evidenced his interest in support of this legislation.

I would like at this point to adjourn this meeting until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.

We will at that time have an executive meeting to hear a couple of members who have not come in yet, Members of Congress, and to see if we cannot get legislation out that will be beneficial to the civil defense of the United States.

(Whereupon, the subcommittee adjourned to reconvene at 10 o'clock the following day, Wednesday, July 20, 1955.)

TO AMEND FURTHER THE FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF 1949, AS AMENDED

(To Authorize the Disposal of Surplus Property for Civil Defense Purposes)

WEDNESDAY, JULY 20, 1955

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SPECIAL GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES SUBCOMMITTEE,
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,

Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 9:05 a. m., in room 1501, House Office Building, Hon. Jack Brooks (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Brooks, Moss, Reuss, Riehlman, Younger, and Krueger.

Also present: Vernon McDaniel, counsel to the subcommittee.

Mr. BROOKS. We will reconvene our hearings on H. R. 4660 and H. R. 7227. And at this time I would like to present a distinguished member from California, Mr. Baldwin, who would like to present a statement in behalf of this legislation.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. BALDWIN, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I do want to appear before you in behalf of H. R. 7227 and H. R. 4660. The civil-defense organizations in my district in California are very much interested in legislation of this type. I have received letters from the State director of civil defense and from the director of civil defense in the largest city in my district, Richmond, and also from the City Council of the City of Martinez, which is the county seat of Contra Costa County, largest of the two counties in the district, and all of them are very much in favor of this legislation.

I think it is most appropriate that we pass legislation of this type. We have passed legislation this session which would make it possible for surplus property to be made available to schools and medical institutions, and I think there are some reasons that make this particular legislation even more advisable than that, in that we have, I think, an even more strong Federal interest in civil defense than we have in the schools and the medical institutions within the States, because I think we all recognize the fact that under the way that possible potential warfare is developed today, that the effectiveness of civil defense is a

41

national problem, and certainly something that the Federal Government has a definite interest in.

My understanding is that under present procedure, the Federal Government is contributing funds to our civil-defense activities, and as long as we are contributing funds to be used by the local civildefense organizations, it certainly seems to me that it is in order that we make available surplus Federal property for the use by these local civil-defense organizations.

I did want to appear for that purpose. I hope very much this committee will act favorably upon these bills, and I hope very much we will have an opportunity to act upon them in the House before we close this session.

Mr. BROOKS. We certainly appreciate your coming down. We are sorry we had to get you down so early, but we too hope we can get something out this session. It is going to be nip and tuck, but we will do our best.

Do you have any questions, gentlemen?

Thank you very much, Mr. Baldwin, for coming down.

Now, gentlemen, I would like to present our fine colleague from the great Rules Committee, our friend, Mr. Harris Ellsworth.

STATEMENT OF HON. HARRIS ELLSWORTH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON; ACCOMPANIED BY H. S. GARBER, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am grateful to you for allowing me to appear on such short notice. I have a three-page statement here which I would just like to read. It will take but a moment.

The bill which the committee has before it for consideration, H. R. 7227, as I understand it, has for its purpose, the broadening of the authority for the disposal of surplus Federal property by making State and local civil-defense units eligible for such property and also to provide special disposal authority to the Secretary of Defense for functions which are of special interest to the Military Establishment. Until such time as the threat of aggression, with possible use of the atomic bomb, by Iron Curtain countries is removed, this Nation must maintain a state of preparedness on the part of both military and civilian populations. State and local civil-defense organizations have been seriously handicapped due to lack of funds for the purchase of materials and equipment essential to effective performance of service in the event of an emergency. It seems a matter of sound judgment to make available for civil defense use materials and equipment from surplus which civil-defense units may keep in readiness to serve communities throughout the United States.

It is generally conceded that if this country were to suffer a major attack, the great majority of civil-defense units would find it almost impossible to meet the emergency for lack of facilities, materials, and equipment. This measure makes possible the meeting of this deficiency to some degree without additional cost to the taxpayer.

Along with the pending measure, I should like to present a suggestion which I believe supplements the general purposes of the bill; namely to provide more effective emergency facilities in the event of

an attack. This suggestion is covered in a bill which I introduced this week and deals with air-medical service.

In recent years, particularly in the West, there has been a rapid growth in the use of air facilities to reach distant areas for various emergency purposes where surface travel was time consuming, difficult, or impractical.

In Oregon, and it may be that similar service exists elsewhere, there was established what is known as Mercy Flights which is an air-medical service. It is privately financed by subscription and donations, operates on an annual budget, and it is exempt from Federal taxes as a charitable nonprofit institution. Mercy Flights is recognized as a medical service by the Oregon State Department of Health and is privileged to carry the official insignia of the Red Cross. The planes operated by this service carry respirators, aspirators, iron lungs, other emergency equipment, and a doctor and nurse are in attendance on its flights.

The medical service furnished by Mercy Flights is comparable to that available at a clinic. The service is available to citizens in distant areas who may have sudden serious illness or injury where prompt medical care is essential to survival. In critical cases, patients may be given necessary immediate medical care and flown to hospital centers for hospitalization. Lives are saved by getting good medical attention to people quickly and by avoiding hours of delay in exhausting motor travel to hospitals. In addition, Mercy Flights has given other emergency services such as delivering medicines, food, and other necessities to people isolated by snow or floods.

With this information in mind, it becomes apparent that such services, established and operating in peacetime, can be of immeasurable value for service in conjunction with civil-defense activities during a national emergency. Such service is too costly to be maintained full time by civil defense and probably too costly in most areas as a taxsupported service. However, I believe the committee will agree that it is an excellent service, whether publicly or privately financed, and a highly desirable supplement to civil defense in an emergency.

The inclusion of my bill as an amendment to the pending bill, H. R. 7227, will add to the basic purposes of having our Nation better prepared for any national disaster. I am sure that similar services will become established in the Nation, particularly in the Western States. The suggested amendment will encourage and aid in making such air medical service available elsewhere.

When the existing law, which H. R. 7227 proposes to amend, was drafted no air medical service was established and consequently cannot be considered to have been within the intent of Congress as eligible for surplus property. Although this service parallels that available at clinics, as defined by the Public Health Service, which are eligible for surplus property under existing law, those administering the law have no legal basis for declaring such air medical services to be eligible.

I am appearing before the committee to ask that my bill, H. R. 7425, be included as a part of H. R. 7227. While my bill was drafted as a separate measure, this can easily be done by substituting my bill for section 2 of H. R. 7227 and including the change in the parenthetical expression in section 2 of H. R. 7227.