2. The bill as it now stands would not provide any money at all for at least 15 States. Some say that half or more of the States will not get any money at all under the bill as it now stands. Senator AIKEN. Pardon an interruption there, Mr. Hecht. I think it will provide money for 23 States at present. The number has increased. Mr. HECHT. In other words, 25 States would get nothing at all? Senator AIKEN. Twenty-five would benefit and twenty-three would not. Mr. HECHT. Twenty-five would benefit? Well, I said 15, so that makes my case even stronger. Twenty-three States would not get anything at all under the bill as it now stands. Senator AIKEN. As I understand it now. Mr. HECHT. Well, I have heard various figures about it. Unfortunately, we do not have accurate information on that point at least. Senator HILL. The bill as originally written, I think provided some money for at least 33 States, but of course, times have changed. The $40 that the witness refers to is, of course, not the same $40 today that it was a year ago, even. Mr. HECHT. I realize that, and that is why I am proposing a change. I think that plan is all wrong, for two reasons. First of all, the citizens of every State pay taxes to the Federal Treasury, and therefore share in the cost of such proposed legislation; consequently, I believe all States should get some benefit from it. Any State, no matter how wealthy, could use Federal money to great advantage in bettering its educational facilities. Secondly and this is a very practical reason-unless every State gets something from this bill, many Representatives in the House, and perhaps some Senators, will vote against it because the territory that they represent would get no benefit from the legislation. therefore suggest that one-third of the money appropriated to the States under the act should be divided among the States in proportion to the number of children in each State between the ages of 5 and 17, inclusive. The remaining two-thirds of the money should be divided according to the present appropriation formula of the bill. Senator AIKEN. Mr. Hecht, you are quite insistent on retaining the formula rather than the direct appropriation of so much per pupil for each pupil in the country? Mr. HECHT. I am for retaining the formula, but I would have twothirds of the money divided according to the formula in the bill, with the $40 changed to $50. And I would have one-third of the money divided in proportion to the number of children between 5 and 17 in the States, and I would like to explain, to elaborate on the reasons for it, and I would like to put into the record the specific change, the wording that I propose to change and that I suggest be changed in section 4 of S. 472. I would amend that section, which is devoted to apportionment, in the following manner: SEC. 4. Ninety-eight percent of the funds appropriated under Section 3 of this Act should be apportioned to the respective States, including those enumerated in subsection G of this section, as provided in this section. 1. Out of the sums made available for allotment to the States for each fiscal year, one-third to be apportioned among the States in the proportion which the number of children in the State between the ages of 5 and 15, inclusive, bears to the total number of children in the United States. 2. Out of the sums made available for allotment to the States, two-thirds (in addition to the allotment made under subsection 1) should be apportioned in the following manner: Then the rest of the section should continue as it reads now, except that the figure "$40" should be changed to the figure "$50" throughout. In explanation of that may I say this: the wealthier States, which would not get any money under the bill as it now stands, would, if this change were incorporated, get Federal money to help them bring the poorer districts, the poorer counties, up to the level of the rest of the State. I happen to live in New York State. Certain counties and certain districts of New York State get very inadequate education money, and if they got some Federal money they would not use it for the wealthy cities like New York, but they would use it in their poorer counties to bring the level of the poorer counties up the to level, or help them bring it up to the level of the rest of the State. This is very important. There is nobody less worthy in a poor district of a wealthy State than in a poor district of a poor State. In both such districts children are getting inadequate education, and inadequate education should be improved and could be improved with more money. The third change that I propose in the bill is that the other two changes will cost considerably more money than the bill as it now stands. As close as I am able to estimate, this will add $100,000,000 per year to the cost of the program. I therefore suggest that the bill be revised to provide an appropriation of $250,000,000 the first year, $300,000,000 the second year, $350,000,000 the third year, and for all subsequent years as much as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the Act. I should like to make certain, however, that even if any or all of these suggested changes are not accepted, I still support S. 472. It is a step in the right direction. I do not think it goes anywhere near far enough as it now stands, but it is a tremendously important and worthwhile beginning. The vitally important thing is to get the United States Government committed to some program of Federal aid for elementary and secondary education, and this must be done at once. The children of America cannot wait any longer. Uncle Sam cannot afford to keep the children of America waiting as they have been over the years. Senator AIKEN. Thank you, Mr. Hecht. Are there any questions? Senator HILL. Might I ask a question here, Mr. Hecht? Your testimony has been very interesting. Does your magazine have a pretty good circulation in the South? Mr. HECHT. It has a very good circulation. Senator HILL. I hope it does, because I am sure you write just as you speak, and I hope it does have a good circulation in the Southern States. Mr. HECHT. It does have a very large circulation in the South. It covers the population centers pretty much in proportion to the population. There is more than a million paid circulation in more than a million families, more than 2,000,000 children in those families. Senator AIKEN. Are there any further questions? If not, we thank you, Mr. Hecht. The Chair will announce at this time that Senators Smith and Thomas were unable to be present at the hearing this morning because of an important meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee, of which they are both members. There was scheduled to appear this morning Mrs. Arthur F. Anderson, president of the Young Women's Christian Association. Mrs. Anderson finds that she is unable to be here today, but sends a letter which expresses the views of the YWCA. Glancing at the letter it appears that this organization supports S. 472, with the exception of section 6 (b). The letter will be incorporated in the record. (The letter referred to follows:) Senator ROBERT A. TAFT, THE NATIONAL BOARD, YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATIONS Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR SIR: The Young Women's Christian Association has had a long and consistent concern for the reducing of inequalities of educational opportunity. In their work with thousands of young women and girls they are constantly aware of the varying degree of efficiency in the educational system of the United States. Through contact with girls in elementary and secondary schools they observe discrepancies in expenditure between different States, the lowness of salaries in many, the increasing shortage of teachers and the unevenness in curricula. At the triennial convention held in Atlantic City in March 1946 the following item in the YWCA public affairs program was adopted: "Recognizing that the welfare of our Nation is largely dependent upon the intellectual integrity of its citizens "We affirm our belief in equal educational opportunity for all people of the United States and will support legislation to bring this about. "We will work for the improvement of educational standards in relation to teacher training, salaries, and curricula." If the children of today who will become the citizens of the postwar world are to meet the many problems of the latter, legislation must be adopted. Recent events, notably the fact that the education of 1,704,000 men in the selective service was below the minimum required for .induction into the armed services has made plain that boys and girls in many communities do not get the equipment necessary to enable them to function as enlightened and alert citizens when they reach adulthood. One section of one of the bills, S. 472 now under consideration concerns the national board viz section 6b-"Provided, That the funds paid to the State under this Act shall be expended only by public agencies and under public control, except that in any State in which funds derived from State or local revenues are disbursed to nonpublic educational institutions for expenditure for any of the purposes for which funds paid to such State may be disbursed to and expended by such institutions for such purposes." The national board of the YWCA believes that the basis of American democracy lies in our public education system. In a democracy the responsibility of the State is to provide education for its citizens in public schools open to everyone on the same basis. The board believes it is not the responsibility of the State to support other than public schools. The YWCA would therefore like to see section 6b deleted and with this deletion would support S. 472, believing that it would be a first step toward greater educational opportunity in this country. Very sincerely yours, Mrs. ARTHUR FORREST ANDERSON, President. Senator AIKEN. The next witness is Mrs. Gertrude F. Zimand, general secretary of the National Child Labor Committee, New York, N. Y. May I ask if Mrs. Margaret F. Stone or James F. Newcomb are in the room? Mrs. Stone represents the National Women's Trade Union League, and Mr. Newcomb represents the printing industry of America. Both were advised that they would be heard today, and neither has been heard from by the committee. STATEMENT OF MRS. GERTRUDE F. ZIMAND, GENERAL SECRETARY, NATIONAL CHILD LABOR COMMITTEE, NEW YORK, N. Y. Mrs. ZIMAND. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the National Child Labor Committee strongly favors Federal aid to the States for education and supports S. 472 with suggestions for two changes. In this statement it presents (a) the basis for its interest in Federal aid, (b) factors indicating the need for Federal aid on which it is in a position to speak as a result of studies, over a period of 40 years, of the related factors of school attendance and child labor, (c) reasons for its endorsement of S. 472 rather than other pending bills, and (d) two suggestions for changes in S. 472. The National Child Labor Committee recognized almost from its inception in 1904, that the movement for the abolition of child labor was in essence an educational movement that taking children out of mines, mills, factories, and fields was simply the negative side of a movement of which giving children greater educational opportunities was the positive side. Its specific activities on Federal aid to general education started in 1910, before any Federal-aid bill had been introduced in Congress. At that time Owen R. Lovejoy, general secretary of the National Child Labor Committee, and John Dewey, a member of its board of trustees, called a national meeting on this subject which was held as part of the annual conference of the National Child Labor Committee. A few years later the National Child Labor Committee was the activating agency in organizing a Committee on National Aid to Education and in 1918, in cooperation with the National Education Association, prepared a draft of a bill for Federal aid to education. Since then the National Child Labor Committee has supported the bills providing Federal aid to education which have been introduced in successive sessions of Congress. It is unnecessary to present argument on the importance of a high standard of education for all children in the country. Nor will we repeat evidence which has been, or will be, submitted by other witnesses on educational conditions in this country, the inadequacies of schools in many sections, especially rural communities; the inequalities of educational opportunities offered to children in the various States, and the extent to which such shortcomings and inequalities are due to the inability of many States to meet the cost of adequate schooling for their children. We wish, however, to call attention to two factors indicating the need for Federal aid on which it believes it is in a special position to offer testimony because of its long study, over a period of 40 years, of the related problems of school attendance and child labor and the reasons prompting children to leave school. 1. One important explanation of the fact that approximately 3,000,000 boys and girls of school age are not enrolled in school is that schools in many communities are of so low a caliber, and are so limited in their curriculum, that they neither hold the interest of children nor convince parents that their children should be in school, The following figures on the number of children not enrolled in school are from the United States Census of 1940. More recent statistics from the United States Office of Education indicate that the number not enrolled is now even greater-which is not surprising since high-school enrollment is still a million less than before the war. The 1940 census figures are used here, however, because they can be broken down by age groups, and by urban, rural nonfarm, and rural farm population. Number of persons 7 to 17 years, inclusive, not attending school-United States Census, 1940: According to the census, a school attendant was a person who during March 1940 was enrolled in or attending any school, college, university, or educational institution. Attendance at night school, extension school, or vocational school was included when such school was part of the regular school system. Not only was there a marked difference in the percentage of children, for each age group, out of school in urban, rural nonfarm and rural farm communities-with the percentage for rural areas very much higher-but there was a great divergence among the 48 States. The range in the percentage of children of specified ages attending school is a as follows: This range omits Kentucky, where the percentage of attendance for rural-farm children reported in the 1940 census is so completely out of line with that of other States, and also the 1930 census figures for Kentucky, that it has no validity for comparative purposes. Studies in various parts of the country of the reasons for nonenrollment and nonattendance of school-age children indicate that |