The return dollarwise which the Federal Government receives for this property is extremely small. This is in spite of substantial and sincere efforts on the part of disposal officers to recover maximum amounts for this property. The fact of the matter is, many civil defense organizations will become extinct unless (1) appropriations to support these groups are increased or (2) provision is made to permit disposal of surplus property owned by the Federal Government to these groups. In view of the present attitude toward appropriations, I urge you to report favorably to the House of Representatives the legislation pending before your committee. Your kindness in permitting me to submit this statement is appreciated. STATEMENT OF HON. HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY The importance of civil defense to the welfare and security of our Nation is recognized by all. Civil defense represents a grassroots effort, organized and manned by civilians to protect our Nation in the event of attack. Because of the public service voluntarily rendered by participants in civildefense organizations, it seems reasonable that civil-defense agencies should qualify with other public agencies in the field of health, welfare, education, and veterans' affairs in eligibility for surplus Government-owned property, purchased in the first instance by the Nation's taxpayers. I take this opportunity, therefore, to express my approval of legislation to accomplish this purpose. I would also like to call the committee's attention to a letter I have received from the Governor of New Jersey regarding the legisation under discussion. Substantially similar letters have been sent to me by Col. Howell L. Hodgskin, deputy coordinator, Union County civil defense and disaster control, Scotch Plains, N. J., and by Norman T. Sprague, director of the Westfield Civil Defense Council, Westfield, N. J. Hon. HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, Jr. House Office Building, Washington, D. C. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, DEAR PETE: There are many items of Federal surplus property, including medical supplies, transportation and radio equipment, that would be very valuable to our State civil-defense organization. Many items that cannot be used by educational institutions and the Veterans' Administration are sold at ridiculously low prices. Many times these same items are resold to civil-defense organizations at a considerable profit. It does not seem logical for our taxpayers to be purchasing equipment twice, once for the military and again for civil defense, with a profit for private individuals added to it. My civil-defense director, Mr. Thomas S. Dignan, has asked me to call your attention to surplus property bills (H. R. 4660 and S. 1527) and recommended that you support them in the interest of civil defense. I am of course not an expert on Federal legislation. There may be other factors involved militating against this legislation of which you could advise me. Sincerely yours, ROBERT B. MEYNER, Governor. STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY ALDOUS DIXON. A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH. Mr. Chairman, since H. R. 4660 was introduced into this Congress, members of the civil defense corps in Utah have been hopeful for its passage to aid them in obtaining surplus property. Their interest, coupled with my own, prompted me to write Chairman Brooks on June 2 and urge that hearings be scheduled for this bill. I feel the success of their program can be greatly implemented by passage of this bill. I quote below a letter from the chairman of the civil defense corps in Utab, which helps explain the need for this material in my State: "The principal needs insofar as the civil-defense program in the State of Utah are the following: Medical and first-aid supplies Mass care equipment-feeding equipment, bedding, tentage Generators Fire-fighting equipment "As you are doubtless aware it is very difficult for us as memoers or the State council of defense to induce our respective governmental subdivisions to make available anything like adequate funds to provide even the minimum recommended by the Federal Civil Defense Administration in spite of the fact that much of the equipment which is recommended actually needs to be available for the ordinary protective measures in the community. "The Utah council of defense feels that by the Government adopting a policy of making available to the civil-defense organizations on a Federal, State, and local level surplus properties a real contribution would be made to the perfection of the organizations throughout the Nation. We also feel that even though it may be somewhat costly that any surpluses that might be made available should be offered in smaller quantities as many of our communities are not in a position to contract for or use advantageously large quantities of any materials. "It has been our experience on several occasions that we could purchase from some of these organizations engaged in selling surplus property on the retail market, commodities particularly in the medical line, at unbelievably low prices as compared with the regular market due to the fact that evidently the surplus commodities have been purchased in very large quantities. "As stated before we feel that after surpluses have been offered to any existing Federal agencies that civil-defense organizations should be given an opportunity to acquire surpluses before any offer is made to the general public. "Thanking you for your attention to this matter, I am "Sincerely, "GUS P. BACKMAN, "Chairman, Civil Defense Corps." Mr. Chairman, I hope the committee will favorably report this bill which is so important to our civil-defense program. STATEMENT OF HON. HUBERT B. SCUDDER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to state my views in support of legislation to provide for the disposal of surplus Government property to State and local civil-defense units. Such units perform a vital function in the defense of our country. They are manned largely by volunteer workers who give generously of their time and energy to the cause of defense. In numerous instances their activities are seriously handicapped by the lack of equipment and supplies. I believe the Federal Government can perform a real service toward encouraging local civil-defense activities by making available to local units a greater share of the property declared surplus by the Government. It seems highly improper that needed surplus, already paid for by taxpayers' dollars, should be channeled to commercial outlets and resold to State and local civil-defense units. I endorse H. R. 7227, or similar legislation, as being the proper approach to this problem and trust the committee will act favorably. I would also like to submit for the record the attached copies of communications I have received as an indication of the support in my congressional district, and in California, of legislation to provide for the distribution of surplus property to civil-defense organizations. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED States, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. JACK BROOKS, House Office Building, Washington, 25, D. C. DEAR JACK: I am enclosing a copy of a telegram I have received from Maj. Gen. Ralph J. Olson, director of civil defense for the State of Wisconsin. I would like to ask that this statement be included in the hearings held by your Special Government Activities Subcommittee and want you to know that I am in full accord with General Olson's views on the matter of utilization of surplus Government owned property in the civil-defense program. I hope you will also record my interest in this legislation in your committee report. Sincerely yours, LESTER JOHNSON. MADISON, Wis., July 18, 1955. Representative LESTER JOHNSON, Congress of the United States, Washington, D. C.: Prior commitment prevents appearance on July 19 before Special Government Activities Subcommittee. Gladly accept your offer to place our statement before Representative Jack Brooks' subcommittee. Statement follows: "Enactment of legislation to permit utilization of surplus Government-owned property by States and their political subdivisions of greatest importance. Acquiring such property will greatly speed up our time table of preparedness. Consider this essential in developing a strong and realistic civil-defense program." RALPH J. OLSON, Major General, Wisconsin, The Adjutant General, Director of Civil Defense. Mr. BROOKS. I would like to present for the record some of the letters we have received. This letter is from T. B. Ellison, president of the County Judges and Commissioners Association of the State of Texas, and he was unfortunately unable to be present. He is in Richmond en route here, but they couldn't get to Washington this morning in time for this meeting. He is also a county commissioner of Jefferson County in the Second Congressional District of Texas. We are pleased to have his testi mony. Also, a letter from Mayor Thomas P. Bryan, of Richmond, Va. Also, a letter from Gen. C. O. Thrasher, director Civil Defense Department of Kansas City, Mo. Also, a letter from Col. Paul J. Calder, director, St. Paul, Minn., civil defense. (The letters referred to are as follows:) Re Surplus Property, Civil Defense. Hon. JACK BROOKS, Member of Congress, Washington, D. C. JEFFERSON COUNTY, Port Arthur, Tex., July 15, 1955. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I was very gratified to learn that you are the chairman of the committee to which this bill has been referred. We would like to see this property used by the cities, counties, and States. Civil defense is a matter of tremendous importance to our cities, counties, and States. All of us are endeavoring to develop adequate and realistic civil defense and disaster relief organizations, without imposing insuperable burdens on taxpayers. Rather than ask new millions in appropriations to buy new things, many of us feel that we should by all means use the things which were originally bought for national defense and are now obsolete for the purpose of the armed forces. This surplus material is needed to insure the safety of our people, to protect property and preserve our human and economic resources. This material having once been paid for by the American people to insure the safety of the Nation. Some of the States have purchased surplus Army equipment from private dealers at approximately twice what the dealers had paid for it at a previous Army sale. This sort of thing makes little sense to us. I know that your committee will give its careful attention to this proposed legislation. We are proud of the diligent and sincere manner in which you are serving the best interest of the people of your district and the people of the Nation in the important position which you hold. Yours truly, T. B. ELLISON, President, County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas. CITY OF RICHMOND, Richmond, Va., July 15, 1955. Hon. JACK BROOKS, Special Government Activities Subcommittee, Committee on Government Operations, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. BROOKS: I have your communication of July 12 relative to proposed legislation to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to authorize disposal of surplus Government-owned property to civil defense organizations of the States and the political subdivisions thereof. We in Richmond have an active civil defense organization but it sorely lacks equipment. By all means if the Federal Government owns property which it considers surplus, the availability of this property to our organization will be of tremendous help and will serve greatly to stimulate interest of additional volunteer civil defense workers. The setting up of adequate plans for the protection of our municipality from possible atomic attack and disaster is of grave importance. It can be accomplished only through the coordinated help of thousands of volunteers. Maintaining an active interest of these volunteers is most difficult if they must go through drills without equipment and without any promise of obtaining sufficient civil defense equipment in the reasonably near future. I, therefore, earnestly hope that your subcommittee will act favorably on the proposed legislation. Sincerely yours, THOMAS P. BRYAN, Mayor. Hon. JACK BROOKS, CITY OF KANSAS CITY, Mo., Chairman, Special Government Activities Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN BROOKS: Reference your memorandum to civil defense directors dated July 12, 1955, with regard to the disposal of surplus Government property to civil defense organizations. I have taken a great interest in the above-mentioned subject over the past 3 years, probably because I was mixed up in Army supply and surplus property over a great number of years. As a matter of fact, I have talked so much about it that I was put on a committee of the National Council of Civil Defense Directors to try to work out a solution. I have a lot of correspondence to the Federal Civil Defense Director and his office on this particular subject and discussed it a great number of times with both he and his assistant, Mr. Aitken. It has been my opinion all along that there are presently existing laws ample to permit the Federal Civil Defense Agency to loan out on long-time receipt any Government surplus property available. To me the failure to do has been a major error as delay has allowed billions of dollars of Government property to be disposed of to no particular advantage to the Government and to the great loss to civil defense directors of badly needed equipment for training. Many outstanding examples may be shown where helmet liners have been destroyed rather than be turned over to civil defense directors; valuable radio equipment of the Air Corps has been held up, in my opinion, needlessly; thousands of surplus first-aid kits have come into commercial hands and now attempts to sell them back to us are going on. The same situation exists with regard to loudspeaking arrangements and many other items. Apparently, the Federal Civil Defense Agency has taken an arbitrary stand that they will not ask other Government departments for surplus property and then put it on loan out to civil defense directors and insist on the act to which you refer. In the interest of civil defense directors, I would say that one of two things must happen-either that FCDA be compelled to operate under existing law or that favorable action be had on the law now before the committee. It is a most important part of legislation for the reason that most budgets of civil defense are much too low, prohibiting the procurement of equipment so necessary for training and I can think of no better way that the Government could utilize this equipment than by making it available to State and local directors. Unfortunately, the services have disposed of the bulk of their surplus property now and opportunity has been lost for its utilization to us. However, there will be more as some items become obsolete and if we are really serious about this civil defense job, we should consider it as a part of the national defense structure and on that basis, approve whatever law is necessary to make the surplus property available. DEAR MR. BROOKS: With reference to your memorandum of July 12, 1955, to the civil-defense directors relative to the proposed amendment to the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1939, I certainly hope that, if amended, civil defense will be in a position to benefit. The way it stands now, there is absolutely no benefit to civil defense. Two years ago, a notice came out from the Federal Civil Defense Administration that civil defense was entitled to surplus Government property. I spent about a week checking up on some of this surplus property at the 31st Air Division and found out that the only things that civil defense was entitled to was junk that nobody could use. I was also given an opportunity to buy some surplus shovels from St. Louis and I took a large number. I received authorization to request shipment, which I did, and that was the last I heard of it. It seems a shame that private agencies can buy this equipment for a very small percent on the dollar and turn around and sell it for a tremendous profit. We have purchased from private surplus stores, helmet liners, the snout-type gas masks, and other materials that I know were purchased from the Government at a very small cost. At the convention of the United States Civil Defense Council last year, one of the delegates present heard of a case where new galvanized buckets were purchased by a private industry for 12 cents apiece and sold to civil defense for a little better than $2. As you no doubt know, civil-defense funds are very scarce at the Federal, State, and local levels, and if we could save money by receiving this surplus gratis, or pay for it on a percentage basis, it would help us tremendously. Hoping this proposed amendment to this act will give civil defense an opportunity to take advantage of a lot of this property that is so badly needed, I would also like to recommend that if this amendment passes that each civildefense agency would get a listing of all surplus Government-owned property. Wishing you success, I remain, Yours very respectfully, Col. PAUL J. CALDER, Director, St. Paul Civil Defense. Mr. BROOKS. We have here many letters and telegrams. The names and positions of these people will be printed in the record, and the contents of their letters or telegrams will be made the property of the committee and filed with the committee for future reference. |