year. We feel sure eventually it will be taken out through the passage of this legislation, but time is of the essence if the States are to plan programs.

Senator HILL. Excuse me 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to interrupt

Senator PURTELL. Senator Hill, we are very happy to have you ask all the questions you want.

Senator HILL. That could be taken out or could be reached in your regular appropriation bill at this time, couldn't it?

Mr. WHITTEN. That is right; but we are told it would have to be repealed. Just to leave it out

Senator HILL. In other words, it didn't just apply to the funds in the bill, the last appropriation bill; it was permanent legislation applying to all future funds.

Mr. WHITTEN. That is right. We are so advised; yes, sir.

Senator HILL. I see. Then that might make it a more difficult problem on the appropriations bill.

Mr. WHITTEN. Yes. Now, I wanted to call your attention, too, to one amendment that was offered by the Secretary when she was here last week as pertains to the Randolph-Sheppard Act, which gives authority to Federal building administrators to allow vending stands for the blind in Federal buildings.

You are having some additional legislation before you on that point. For instance, one bill which has been introduced is H. R. 8530. I don't know whether the Senate bill is here on that yet or not. I wanted to state the principles that we think ought to apply in amending the Randolph-Sheppard Act. The administration's proposal is generally acceptable to us except it doesn't go quite as far in one detail as we think the bill ought to go.

We believe that the bill should guarantee preference to blind persons in the operation of such vending stands where it is found that there is a suitable place for a vending stand. At the present time building administrators are not required to give preference. They are just authorized to allow such stands.

In the second place, if a vending

Senator HILL. Doesn't the language say specifically, in authorizing the operation of vending stands on Federal property, preference shall be given so far as is feasible to blind persons?

Mr. WHITTEN. That is Mrs. Hobby's amendment you have there, is it?

Senator HILL. Yes.

Senator PURTELL. Yes.

Mr. WHITTEN. That is right; her bill does take care of this. That is right. Now, there is just one thing that her bill did not do that we think ought to be done. For instance, if a vending stand exists in a Federal building, we believe that the profits of vending machines in the same building should accrue to the operator of the vending stand. At the present time, there is a controversy existing. Employee groups are trying to get the use of concessions of that kind to implement their welfare and recreation funds, and the General Services Administration has been unable to resolve this dispute. We know that in presenting the administration proposal, they were not able to get agreement of all of the departments with respect to that feature,

for which reason it was left out of the administration bill, but we, ourselves, think that ought to be in the bill, that if the vending machine is in the same building where the vending stand is, that the profits from the machine ought to accrue to the owner of the stand. Otherwise the profits to the vending stand can be drained off, you see, through vending machines set up by a competing organization.

Senator PURTELL. Let me see if I understand this correctly. There may be in a post office installation a stand, for instance-I am thinking of post office particularly in the lobby where the public has access. There may be scattered through some of the large post offices many, many vending machines. There may be one blind person operating that stand in the lobby.

It is your belief that all of the profits from the vending machines throughout that total building should accrue to the person running that stand in the lobby?

Mr. WHITTEN. That is the idea. In the larger buildings, Mr. Chairman, generally you will find more than one site favorable for a vending stand for the blind. In other words, we have several Federal buildings in the country where there are more than one vending stand for the blind.

Senator PURTELL. Of course they have many vending machines where no attention need be paid to them except by filling and so forth. Mr. WHITTEN. That is true.

Senator PURTELL. Except by the owner of the vending machine, the concessionaire.

Mr. WHITTEN. That is right.

Senator PURTELL. You would want the profits to accrue to either one or more of the blind people operating those stands in the public lobby, in the lobby where the public has access to it?

Mr. WHITTEN. That is right. Such machines are competitive. For instance, a fellow either goes to the stand to buy his cigarettes, or he buys them in the vending machine somewhere. Now, they even have vending machines, as you know, for Coca-Cola, for almost anything that can be sold in the vending stand. This is the only way we know to protect the interest of the blind.

Senator GOLDWATER. Mr. Chairman, I think that is a very fine proposal. The vending machine competition to the stand is getting to the point actually where you don't need the stand, and if we don't recognize that competition, you are going to defeat the very purpose of the original language of this bill, to give additional work to the blind. We have it in many Federal buildings in this city, where you can purchase nearly everything you want out of a vending machine. I personally think this is an excellent suggestion.

Senator PURTELL. You knew, of course, that Mrs. Secretary had offered this amendment to the Randolph-Sheppard Act.

Senator GOLDWATER. Yes. I was glad to hear it brought up at this meeting by Mr. Whitten because it lends strength to the Secretary's request for this. We have had this down at the State level for a long, long time.

Mr. WHITTEN. We really have had situations thoroughly unwholesome in some of the States where the competition between the blind and other groups has just become embarrassing, and I don't think that any member of Congress ever intended that it should develop in that fashion.

Senator HILL. May I ask a question in that connection? I am very much interested in all you are saying, and I am, like Senator Goldwater, very deeply sympathetic with this idea of providing work for our blind. I wonder if you have given any thought as to new public buildings to be erected-and what brings the thing home to me particularly at this time is that we have a building here sponsored by the administration that looks mighty good on the face of it for what we call a lease purchase of a building by the Government that doesn't have to put out so much capital expenditure constructing the building itself-private parties, perhaps, build a building, and then over a certain period of time you amortize that cost of the building as well as paying some return to the builders of the building, and at the end of a certain period the Government, for maybe a reasonable small sum of money, has the right to buy that building. Do you know in designing these buildings whether or not any thought has been given to the location in them of a particular little place for the operation of such as you have in mind for the blind?

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, I just do not know whether any provisions are being made or not.

Senator HILL. I think you might well think about it. I think you might well think about that. I was at the opening of a new hospital here a few days ago, and they had provided a place. Instead of having vending machines or some kind of a little stand in the lobby, as you walk in, they had provided a very convenient place right on one edge of their cafeteria, a place for the operation of such a stand which made it just as convenient as being in the lobby, and yet it removed some of the factors against having it right there in the lobby where at times maybe some postmasters and some managers of buildings do not wish to have them.

Mr. WHITTEN. Yes, that is true. That is a problem in some buildings, finding an adequate place for it.

Senator HILL. Finding an adequate place, and sometimes you just have to go into a lobby, so to speak, which hasn't been designed with the idea in mind of having any such operation there, and you don't have too favorable a situation. So I was thinking, now it looks as though we may be going into a new program to buy new buildings, we might think in terms of making some provision in the architectural plans of these buildings for a stand such as you have in mind here. Mr. WHITTEN. You know, you bring up a thought to me, too. I am not sure whether the Randolph-Sheppard Act would apply to such a building as you are talking about or not, unless specific mention was made, and that might be something that should be looked into, too.

Senator HILL. That may be true, and I will tell you why. You see, the Randolph-Sheppard Act, as I recall, applies to Federal property, and these buildings, as I understand, that will be built under this leasepurchase program, of course, will not become Federal property until maybe 20 years or 25 years or after the building has been constructed, at which time, as I understand it, the Government will have a right, an option, to purchase the property, which means the title will pass to the Government and then become Federal property, but over the long period of time these buildings would not be Federal property, so I would certainly suggest you take a look at that bill.

Mr. WHITTEN. The Randolph-Sheppard bill uses the term "Federal building," but it probably assumed the ownership of the building by the Federal Government.

Senator HILL. I notice that Mrs. Hobby, in her amendment, uses the term "Federal property."

Mr. WHITTEN. That is a substitute for the word “building” in the present act.

Senator HILL. "Property." There would be no question if you use the word "property" that it would mean where the title was in the Federal Government.

Mr. WHITTEN. Yes; I think you are right. Mr. Chairman, that about completes my oral presentation. I want to say, as I think I have intimated all through this statement, that we are taking a positive position with respect to the President's proposals. In other words, we feel that they provide the framework for a big program of expansion of rehabilitation which is badly needed. This program started in 1920, and it grew slowly until 1943 when the Barden-LaFollette amendments were passed and gave a big impetus to it. It reached its present level, and there has been a tendency for it to be on a sort of plateau now for 2 or 3 years, as, apparently, Congress has not been quite satisfied with the methods of financing, and there have been uncertainties in the State with respect to what the future is going to be.

Now we are ready; I think we are at a crossroad. I think we are ready for some renewed emphasis in rehabilitation, and the passage of this bill, with some corrections which I think I have pointed out, will do what I think the Presidents wants to have done. `Mr. Chairman, that there are many of us in this field of rehabilitation-I sometimes think, in fact, more people think they are experts in it than in nearly anything else I know of-and we will have some differences of opinion with respect to how details should be operated, but as for me and my association, we urge the committee to resolve the differences that may appear between us and to report a bill that will expand the rehabilitation of the handicapped. We don't want differences of opinion to prevent the passage of a constructive piece of legislation at this time, and that is our final appeal to you.

Senator PUTELL. Mr. Whitten, reference has been made during these hearings to the number of technical personnel available, and in training for these different phases of vocational rehabilitation work. Do you have any information on this matter which might be useful to this committee in its deliberations?

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, probably so, Mr. Chairman, although not in as much detail as I would really like to have such information.

I think probably in answer to that question I should say that rehabilitation is a broad field and requires the utilization of specialists in many areas; for instance, the counselor, the physician, physical therapist, occupational therapist, social worker, and several different specialized degrees of social work, the rehabilitation counselor, and even others.

In other words, the solution to the problem of personnel does not depend upon the development of any one group.

When it comes to my concern for personnel, my chief concern is in the field of rehabilitation counselors and physical therapists, because I think the shortage is greater there. For instance, we have now in the Federal-State program of rehabilitation about 1,200 counselors, people who carry caseloads, actually working with the crippled people. It is estimated that under the President's proposal about 3,000 more will be needed by 1960.

One thing that is alarming about this is the fact that there is as yet no real formal way of training rehabilitation counselors in great numbers. There are only three universities in the country that train counselors on the graduate level, New York University, Columbia University, and Ohio State University, and altogether they have about 60 or 70 in training at the present time.

Now, our association has a committee, by the way, which is trying to define the rehabilitation counselor's job and to help colleges and universities institute curricula which will train such persons.

I mentioned the physical therapist. At the present time we have 29 schools of physical therapy-by the way, this is a key person in the physical medicine rehabilitation section. It is a person that actually does the manipulating of joints, muscles, and so forth, which brings about the recovery.

There are only 527 students in those schools at the present time, although 1,100 could be taken care of with the facilities now existing. Just exactly what we are going to do to get enough physical therapists to operate our program is difficult to know unless some artificial stimulant to recruiting, scholarships, and so forth to provide such training is used.

Senator PURTELL. I might say that we have here a list of the approved schools of physical therapy, and at this point in the record we will insert it, have it become a part of the record.

(The list of approved schools of physical therapy is as follows :)