cosponsored by Senators Kefauver, Carroll, and Langer, and to present to you what I feel to be imperative reasons why this legislation should be passed into law as soon as possible. Because of the pressure of Senate business, I find it impossible to appear, but I appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement. I feel that having been associated with this problem for the greater part of my life, I can speak with some degree of personal knowledge of the needs in this area.

For many years I have seen, firsthand, the serious threat of juvenile delinquency, both as chairman of the Senate's National Penitentiaries Subcommittee and as a member and chairman of the Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. I continually visit Federal institutions, both reformatories and penitentiaries, and it is here that I am made painfully aware of the disastrous results of what in the majority of cases started out as juvenile offenders. Having been a criminal prosecutor for 6 years, prosecuting thousands of felony cases, I know that so many times a criminal began his career as a juvenile delinquent. He begins as a delinquent and graduates from the juvenile courts and institutions to adult criminal courts and penitentiaries.

I am not a "Johnny-come-lately" in the delinquency field. I have been an active member of the Big Brother organization for about 35 years of my life. I have been the national director and now hold that position in an honorable capacity. I have worked with young boys in this organization and know that, with the proper help, they can be saved.

After having thus presented my qualifications to speak on this subject, I should like to relate to you gentlemen on the committee some distressing facts that make the passage of this legislation a vital necessity for the safety and future welfare of our Nation.

Let me initially outline to you the scope of delinquency as it exists nationally as reported just last week in the annual report of the Committee on the Judiciary's Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee.

1. Reliable reports from both State and Federal agencies indicate that this country is experiencing an ever-increasing rise in its delinquency rate than has been going on for almost a decade.

2. In the 9-year period from 1949 through 1957, the last year for which we have relatively complete information, appearances before the juvenile court for delinquency increased by almost 21⁄2 times.

3. There were 603,000 appearances by a total of 520,000 juveniles before the Nation's juvenile courts during 1957.

4. During this same period there were approximately 1,700,000 appearances by boys and girls before the police.

Based on the above figures, we can expect more than 800,000 juveniles to come. before the courts in 1965 and almost 900,000 by 1970 because of population increases alone. These figures are only predictions from the totals derived in the year 1957. However, if we consider the unfaltering trend that has been develop ing for the 8 years previous to that, we can expect a little over a million children to appear before the courts in 1965 and a staggering 1,400,000 by 1970.

There is another point I should like to clarify at this time. It has become the fashion in the last several years to look at the delinquency statistics for any one year, which show usually that only 2 to 3 percent of the total juvenile popu-. lation appeared before the court in that year, and conclude that we are not in such bad shape after all because 97 to 98 percent of our children are lawabiding. I submit that the public and the Government have been deluding themselves in this narrow approach to the total problem. We feel that it is more realistic to approach delinquency from the following point of view. We must look at what has been called a "delinquency generation," which has been described as anygroup of children between the ages of 10 through 17 in any given 8-year period. Looking at it this way, we find that year after year these are not the same. children appearing before the juvenile courts, but in any succeeding year approximately 65 percent of these children are new delinquency cases.

Approaching it from this angle, we find that anywhere from 16 to 20 percent of our total male population in the above-mentioned age group has, at one time. or another, within the recent past, appeared before the juvenile court for having committed one or more delinquent acts.

What does this mean in terms of numbers? It means that we can actually count, today, 1,700,000 young people in our population who have had such a juvenile court experience, and we feel safe in estimating that in a very short time we will have over 2 million such persons.

The effect of this increasing number of social misfits on our society is almost unbelievable when looked at in its parts. As chairman of the Delinquency Subcommittee, I have gone around the country and have seen, firsthand, what can happen when large groups of such children are allowed to accumulate in our social institutions. In our school systems, for example, we found increases in classroom disruption, extortion rackets, brutal beatings, and even rape and murder.

We have also seen the effects of such individuals on the efficiency of our Armed Forces, whihc are forced many times to take individuals of this type from the available manpower pool. In the event of a national emergency, the debilitating effect of these individuals on the efficiency of our fighting machine is almost inconceivable. We have seen what happens when these children form groups known as gangs and begin to overrun blocks, neighborhoods, and indeed, entire communities, terrorizing the law-abiding citizens, practically eliminating effective law enforcement and turning whole sections of cities into personal battlegrounds.

Getting to the two bills before the committee, let us now take a look at two of the main reasons this situation exists in our great country: First of all, we find that there is an appalling lack of people trained in the skills necessary to prevent, treat, and control this social disease known as delinquency; secondly, where progressive State or local governments have done their utmost to provide adequate numbers of facilities or trained personnel, our present methods of handling delinquents are so lengthy and involved that only small numbers of the hordes of delinquents coming through our juvenile courts can be handled with any degree of success.

As I told the Senate when I introduced these bills, the subcommittee has found that in almost every instance courts are hampered because of a lack of trained probation and social workers to implement the decision and prescription of the judge; juvenile institutions are too frequently reduced to mere programs of containment; guidance clinics and other social agenices, if available, are forced to spread their ministrations so thin that the end result of their efforts is practically worthless; and the police departments with the necessary trained, special assistants, these police departments, gentlemen, I can count on my fingers. In community after community, we found this same pattern and we have listened to the incessant pleas for more training of present personnel and an increase in the available pool of people with the skills necessary for handling delinquents.

The subcommittee has witnessed firsthand the confusion and evil results of this paucity of probation officers, psychologists, psychiatric social workers, etc. In the city of New York we spoke to sincere, well-intentioned people, whose only available source of manpower would be another agency. Piracy was rampant. But that I mean the only way to get good people would be to entice them away from other agencies in the community. Thus the juvenile court in New York City, while having budgetary provisions for 10 psychologists, only had 1 available because the remaining 9 had been lured away by the somewhat higher stipend provided for in the public school system. The courts in the city were having their probation officers lured away by the courts in other parts of the State that offered more money. This, in effect, made the city courts a training center for young social workers just out of college, and as soon as they became proficient in their profession, they would leave and go on to more lucrative but similar positions outside of the city.

We are all aware of the effect of this shortage of personnel and facilities. The whole world knows what happened a year ago in the New York schools. The reverberations were felt even on the floor of the Senate here in Washington. The city and State of New York and the entire Nation were shocked by an unprecedented wave of juvenile hoodlumism and violence. In its analysis of this situation, the subcommittee determined that the major factor in this development was this tremendous shortage in available personnel to meet a problem that responsible persons knew for many years was fast approaching.

Right here in our own city we have witnessed the shocking effects of social agencies of the city government being forced to accept incompetent, inadequately trained, or morally undesirable personnel for use in juvenile institutions. In our last annual report, No. 1429, we hopefully recommended that:

1. Both men and women being employed for work in correctional institutions be more closely screened to make certain that their background is one of emotional stability and good character. By being more careful in employment of

41638-59--10

these people, there will be less chance of sadistic or perverted individuals obtaining entry into an atmosphere peculiarly suited to their desires.

Yet what was the District government to do but accept less than the best when the best is just not available. Thus, after committing juveniles to institutions ostensibly for retraining, we instead further warp their young minds and distort their view of adult society by exposing them to incompetent, morally undesirable adults who are in a position to exert their wishes over these people under the guise of a responsible authority.

In our hearing on institutions for the rehabilitation and treatment of juvenile delinquents, we were told that similar situations exist throughout the United States.

The second of our bills provide for Federal funds for the subsidization of special projects or promising programs that might insure us greater success in preventing or treating delinquents.

I might give a brief example here. In the city of New York and in other large cities, we find that many times as much as 75 percent of the total juvenile delinquency population comes from a very small segment-sometimes as little as 1 percent of the total family population. These families not only produce delinquents, but they produce every other type of mental, physical, and emotional disorder known to man. They not only produce it once, but they reproduce it and multiply.

One such special project that has been proposed before this subcommittee would be the establishment of what has been called a "therapeutic community," i.e., a focusing of the entire services of a community on such a special segment of the population which has been gathered together for the sole purpose of exposing the entire family to a total plan of rehabilitation. This is to me one of the most promising new approaches to the solving of the delinquency problem.

Another interesting approach proposed by one of our witnesses is based on the hard fact that there is an inadequate number of trained personnel and this situation is bound to exist for some time to come. In view of this, we must develop newer techniques of treatment so that instead of 1, 2, or 3 years of lengthy institutional incarceration, juveniles might be exposed to 3 or 4 months of intensive 24-hour treatment based on new concepts of treatment which could result in the same degree of rehabilitation as the lengthier periods. This would allow the same number of personnel to handle many, many more delinquents.

There are only a few of the progressive approaches to solving our delinquency problem. However, I and the members of the subcommittee are firmly convinced that it is only through the major participation of the Federal Government, through the two mechanisms provided in these bills, that any appreciable change in our delinquency picture will come to pass.

Our increase in delinquency rate has come about because of changes in our family life, changes in the basic attitudes of our society and changes in our economic and social situations. We must, therefore, attack the problem not by wringing our hands and crying for a return to the good old days, but by applying new and imaginative programs and approaches and applying them with enough trained personnel and with enough of our resources, including Federal resources, if we are to save fully a fifth of our future young adults from heading for, at worst, a life of crime or, at best, a twilight world of social-economic maladjustment.

STATEMENT BY SENATOR ESTES KEFAUVER IN SUPPORT OF S. 765 AND S. 766,

MAY 4, 1959

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to thank you for the opportunity of making a statement in support of S. 765 and S. 766, which were introduced by my good friend, Senator Hennings, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, and which Senators Carroll, Langer, and I are cosponsoring.

S. 765 would provide for assistance to States and institutions of higher learning for demonstrating or developing improved techniques and practices for the diminution, control, and treatment of juvenile delinquency; and S. 766 would provide for assistance to and cooperation with States and institutions of higher learning for the training of qualified personnel for work in various fields involving the prevention, treatment, and control of juvenile delinquency.

This legislation is of particular interest to me because I, as a member and former chairman of the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, have been associated with similar bills during the preceding two Congresses.

I am going to depart somewhat from what has been the custom in discussing juvenile delinquency. I am not going to cry out in alarm at the rising tide of lawlessness among our youth; this is a matter of common knowledge and the testimony is agreed on this and on the urgency of the need for action. There have been and are many cries of alarm, much deploring, and constant handwringing over the problem of juvenile delinquency. We see it in the papers each day; we hear about it on the floor of the Senate; and we receive countless letters on the subject. Unfortunately, none of this activity brings us nearer to a solution.

We hear from all sides, and indeed it seems from above and below too, that juvenile delinquency is a result of poor home life. So it may be. But saying so also does not provide us with the answer. We here cannot legislate the good homes, the responsible parents, and the other environmental factors necessary for the rearing of law-abiding and useful citizens. If we can't do this, what can we do? Action is necessary-that is agreed. But what kind of action? The passage of these two bills which the committee has under consideration would be action which might bring us much closer to a solution than anything else we have done. We cannot change some things and we must accept that fact. There is the possibility, however, that we can prevent delinquency in many cases and that we can salvage some lives that have already started down the criminal path.

We know more about delinquency than we did 10 or 20 years ago, but there is still much we do not know. Also, we do not always know how to apply the knowledge which has been gained over the years, and we often do not have the personnel, money, and facilities to translate our knowledge into a workable program.

The provisions of these two bills, S. 765 and S. 766, if enacted into law, could be the spur to acquiring new knowledge and applying that knowledge by persons equipped to understand and administer it. In human terms, it could be that many of our young persons who get into trouble could have help that has not heretofore been available. If we cannot change a child's home life and his parents, perhaps we can give that child expert help so that he in turn does not become an inadequate parent. With the techniques that are being developed for the early detection and prevention of delinquency, perhaps many may be saved from committing the first delinquent act.

The projects and the training of personnel which would be provided by these measures could be a dam against the tide of delinquency which has been sweeping across our land. These bills would not make the Federal Government the guardians of the Nation's delinquents. Rather, they would give a small amount of aid and leadership to States and communities so that they might better help themselves. This, I feel, is as it should be.

I believe that the American community is not only willing to accept such legislation, but I believe that it is generally felt that some such action by the Federal Government is necessary.

The Congress has now been considering legislative action along the lines of these two bills for a number of years, and I should like to outline briefly the history of these legislative proposals which the committee is considering.

During the 84th Congress, S. 728, a bill to provide assistance to and cooperation with States in strengthening and improving State and local programs for the control of juvenile delinquency, grew out of our work on the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, and I was joined in introducing this measure in January 1955, by Senators Hennings and Langer. After extensive hearings before a special subcommittee of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Senator Herbert Lehman favorably reported a revised bill, S. 4267, which passed the Senate in the closing days of the 84th Congress. No action was taken by the House of Representatives.

During the 85th Congress, I introduced S. 431, which was similar to S. 4267 of the 84th Congress, and was again joined by Senators Hennings and Langer. A number of bills on the same subject were introduced by other Members of the Senate. At least 11 versions of this legislation were presented to the House of Representatives, and hearings were held on 10 of these measures by the Subcommittee on Special Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor.

However, none of these bills was reported and no action resulted on these legislative proposals during the 85th Congress.

In the meantime, the need for action had increased and the yearly statistics on juvenile delinquency were a grim reminder that we ahd not even begun to cope effectively with this national threat. Because of our concern and disappointment with the failure of the 84th and 85th Congresses to pass some measure to alleviate the situation, the staff of the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency was instructed during the past summer to analyze this legislation in an effort to see if revisions were necessary in the light of our experiences since 1955.

The bills, S. 765 and S. 766 are the results of that study and we believe they incorporate the essential provisions of the original legislation. There were several reasons for breaking the larger bill, which we referred to as an omnibus bill, down into two separate bills. One was that we felt that the aims and provisions of the legislation could be more clearly defined in this way. Another reason is that it was felt that the need for action was almost desperate, and while we are not willing to settle for half a loaf and feel that both bills should be passed, we would rather see one enacted into law than none.

The original legislation called for a Federal Advisory Council on Juvenile Delinquency which we now feel can be dispensed with. Such a Council would have served to advise the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and we feel that the Children's Bureau and other agencies of the Department are well staffed with competent and expert personnel in many fields directly and indirectly related to juvenile delinquency. For that reason, we do not see the necessity at this time for the formation of still another Council to advise people who are already experts.

During this current session of the 86th Congress, a number of bills on the subject of juvenile delinquency have been introduced in addition to the two measures which I have been discussing. In the House of Representatives, legislative hearings have already been held again by the Special Education Subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor. For a matter of some 4 years, we have been introducing legislation to provide aid to States and communities in handling their delinquency problems, and numerous witnesses have been called and recalled to testify on these measures. I wonder, gentlemen, what we are waiting

for. I should like to read to you a few excerpts from a column which apeared in the Washington Post and Times Herald on January 8, 1959, in which delinquency legislation is discussed.

"Numerous bills have been introduced in recent sessions of Congress and hearings have been held widely by investigating committees, but relatively little has been done on a national scale to prevent and combat juvenile crime.

"Although 'research' has become a magic word in relation to weapons, disease, industrial products, it has failed to rouse congressional interest as means of preventing and treating delinquency.

"Also greatly needed in meeting this national problem are more trained specialists.

"Certainly it (juvenile delinquency problem) is big enough and serious enough to require a coordinated national attack. Both the causes and costs of youth: crime reach beyond city, county, and State boundaries."

In conclusion, I should like to reemphasize the fact that the need is acute and is growing. These two measures which I am supporting here today will not answer all our juvenile delinquency problems, but their enactment would be a constructive step in meeting the threat which delinquency poses for our Nation. I strongly commend these two bills to you for favorable consideration.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR WILLIAM LANGER, MEMBER, SENATE JUDICIARY SUBCOMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

Mr. Chairman and members of the Juvenile Delinquency Subcommitte, I am directing my remarks to you as one of the original members of the Senate Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency which began in the summer of 1953 with little realization on the part of myself and the other members of the subcommittee at that time of the immenseness of the problem we were about to face.

I would like to relate to you today a few of the facts that we have accumulated during these intervening years which I feel are quite convincing evidence of the need for the passage of the two bills, S. 765 and S. 766, which you gentlemen are