Mr. ROONEY. Who was the Hollywood millionaire who gave up on them? Mr. Bow. They had a movie actor. Mr. ROONEY. Gene Autry? Mr. Bow. Perhaps, he was one of the well-known western actors who had the thing and set it up. He reneged. They kept calling him to get money and he finally reneged on it. STATUS OF PROGRAM FOR REFERRALS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES Mr. THOMAS. You have 83 referrals from other countries. They are set up here. You have $75,000, $21,000 of which is for transportation, medical care, and other services. How much have you used to date? What has this program cost you? Mr. TRUELSON. This is the part of the program that has not started yet. We have not had any authority for assisting U.S. citizens coming from countries other than Cuba. Mr. THOMAS. This is in the new act? Mr. TRUELSON. Yes, sir. Mr. THOMAS. You have got authority. You do not have the to implement it? Mr. WYNKOOP. Exactly, sir. Mr. THOMAS. How do you arrive at the figure of $75,000? money Mr. TRUELSON. We estimated there would be approximately 120 families to be cared for and at an average of $130 Mr. THOMAS. Where do you get your 120? You use a figure of 83 here. In 1961 you had 83 families. That was only 33 over 1960. What makes you think it is going up? Why could it not go down as easily as it could go up? Mr. TRUELSON. We are of the opinion that with the way the number has been increasing there will be a larger number that would be in need of assistance. Mr. THOMAS. Say you have a hundred families. At $1,500 a year, how much money does that represent? Mr. TRUELSON. This would provide for an average of 5 months' assistance for one-half of the 120 families, the average payment I mentioned, $130. That is the way we arrived at the $75,000. Mr. THOMAS. It will cost you about $15,000 a month. Mr. TRUELSON. Roughly one-half of that. Mr. THOMAS. Are there any questions, gentlemen? Mr. KIRWAN. I have none. Mr. JONAS. I would like to ask a question. LENGTH OF TIME FOR GIVING TEMPORARY RELIEF Who will determine how long a period will be temporary? Miss GOODWIN. The State welfare departments will carry responsibility for the cases. We will require that the State welfare departments review the situation at least at periodic intervals. Mr. JONAS. The law does not require you to just accept the word of the State welfare department. Miss GOODWIN. No, sir. Mr. JONAS. The law says that you may provide temporary assistance in addition to sending them home. Who will make the determination as to how long is temporary? Miss GOODWIN. What I was saying, sir, was we would require the State welfare departments to review the situation at frequent intervals to make sure that the assistance is still needed and that no other plan can be made for the people. As a general rule of thumb, I would say it should not continue beyond a year. There could be instances, and we have had some instances in the past where people have come who are seriously ill-not mentally ill, but physically ill, where it has been necessary for assistance to continue. BASIS FOR DETERMINING NEED Mr. JONAS. Who will determine whether these cases are cases of destitution and whether they are without available resources? Miss GOODWIN. The welfare department at the port of entry will make the first determination. In fact, the State Department before the people come in will make a determination. Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Jonas, if they were destitute, how did they get there? Miss GOODWIN. The State Department in most instances brought them. Mr. JONAS. I have in mind the case of a lady from my State who was among those drowned when the bus recently ran into the lake in Switzerland. She has no resources, but her brother and sister raised $1,500 to bring her body back. If we are going to support people when they are alive, it looks like we should bring their bodies back. Miss GOODWIN. We do not have responsibility as to who is brought back-dead or alive. That is for the State Department. Our responsibility begins when they get to the United States. After they have been screened at the port of entry, they would be met by representatives of the welfare department that would make the determination as well as they can at that point of what assets they have. In case of doubt they would take a promise to repay. Of course, if they obviously do have assets, they would take a promise also. There would be very few instances in which there would not be some means of recovering if they did have some funds. Mr. JONAS. If a family is destitute or without means of subsistence when it is brought back to the United States and you take that family to its home or to the home of relatives, how is that family entitled to any more assistance than any other destitute family in a community? Why wouldn't it be a local relief proposition? Miss GOODWIN. We do have local residence laws in this country. Mr. JONAS. They have 30 days in New York, do they not? Can't they go on relief when they have been there 30 days? Mr. KELLY. In many States it is a year. Mr. THOMAS. California is a year. Miss GOODWIN. If they are eligible for State public assistance, they would receive it as soon as possible. Mr. JONAS. If it were not for public assistance, you would not continue with this? Miss GOODWIN. No. NEED FOR CONTINGENCY FUND Mr. THOMAS. Tell us about the contingency fund of $50,000. How badly are you in need of that? Miss GOODWIN. We need it because it is so difficult to know what will happen. I think the Cuban situation is really very illustrative because you cannot tell from day to day whether there will be a new movement of several hundred people or whether it will be in the opposite direction. This is merely to have some means of meeting emergencies. Mr. THOMAS. Who does the screening, the State Department or you folks in taking care of these Cubans? Miss GOODWIN. The screening is done by the State Department. In the case of Cuba I do now know who does it in Cuba, but the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and where necessary, the FBI do the screening before they get to us. Mr. THOMAS. Have any of these folks been turned down in any instances? Miss GOODWIN. I do not know. Mr. TRUELSON. Yes. They have been turned down. Miss GOODWIN. Yes, for assistance. Mr. THOMAS. What is the basis on which they were turned down? Miss GOODWIN. They had assets. Mr. THOMAS. There is no question about their loyalty to the United States after the Immigration and Naturalization Service gets through with them. Who investigates them besides them? They have no jurisdiction to go into loyalty, do they, or do they go into that? Miss GOODWIN. I do not know where the dividing line is between what they do and what the FBI would do. Mr. ROONEY. We are dealing only with American citizens, are we not? Mr. WYNKOOP. Yes, sir. Mr. THOMAS. The Immigration and Naturalization Service would not go beyond American citizens. Mr. ROONEY. Unless there was some information that turned up. Mr. THOMAS. Thank you, Miss Goodwin, and your staff. Thank you very much. It is always nice to see you. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 16, 1961. OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL WITNESSES ALANSON W. WILLCOX, GENERAL COUNSEL Mr. THOMAS. We shall now hear from the Office of General Counsel. It is noted that the estimate included in House Document No. 217 is $40,000. We have with us a very distinguished and able lawyer, General Counsel, Mr. Willcox, accompanied by his administrative officer, Mr. Sileargy, and his budget analyst, Mr. Hambleton. What do you have on your mind? Mr. WILLCOX. We have two item requests. Mr. THOMAS. You want $40,000; $20,000 to be transferred from the trust fund. Please proceed. GENERAL STATEMENT Mr. WILLCOX. Mr. Chairman, if I may put my prepared statement in the record, I will speak briefly. Mr. THOMAS. Yes. We will place it in the record verbatim. (The statement follows:) OPENING STATEMENT BY GENERAL COUNSEL The supplemental estimate of $40,000 will provide $20,000 for added workload placed on the legal staff of the Public Health Division by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1961, Public Law 87-88, and $20,000 for added workload placed on the Old Age and Survivors Insurance Division by the Social Security Amendments of 1961, Public Law 87-64. Public Health Division.-The amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Public Law 87-88) will have a significant impact on the quantity and kind of legal services required to service the program. Of principal concern are: (1) The expansion of enforcement activity resulting from the extension of enforcement jurisdiction to "interstate or navigable waters" and the authorization of enforcement proceedings in some cases at the request of local authorities. Enforcement proceedings include the calling of conferences and the holding of hearings; these proceedings require the advice and participation of attorneys throughout. (2) It is estmiated that construction grant applications with attendant legal programs, will increase from 550 annually to 800 in 1962, and 1,000 in 1964. (3) It is expected that there will be approximately 30 applications from 25 States in the first year of operation for grants for intermunicipal projects authorized by the 1961 amendments. These projects will present difficult and complicated legal problems not present in the ordinary project. (4) The additional grants to aid communities whose project need is due in part to Federal installations or Federal construction activity will result in an increase in legal services in the administration of the program. (5) Responsibility for the administration and enforcement of the provision making the Davis-Bacon Act applicable will involve legal services in the investigation of compliance and complaints, including conferences, negotiations and hearings. The $20,000 will provide for 2 attorneys and 1 secretary for this additional workload. Old Age and Survivors Insurance Division.-The Social Security Amendments of 1961 (Public Law 87-64) will require additional appropriations for fiscal year 1962 to provide legal services in: 1. Drafting of new regulations, revision of existing regulations, and the review of adjudicative instructions to reflect the five major revisions in the act. 2. The furnishing of legal advice to the Social Security Administration on claims based upon these revisions. It is estimated that the 1961 amendments will bring about an increase in the claims load of almost 30 percent over the 32 million claims now being filed annually. 3. The negotiation and drafting of modifications to State agreements, and the rendering of legal services in connection with the administration of such agreements, covering additional State and local government employees who are first made eligible for title II coverage by the 1961 amendments. |