STATEMENT OF HON. JOEL T. BROYHILL, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. BROYHILL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be as brief as possible because I know we have several witnesses here who have a lot to contribute to this testimony this morning.

I should like to thank the Chairman for arranging these prompt hearings. I regret that we do not have more members of the committee present this morning, but that is not indicative of the interest of the Committee because I have talked with most members of this Subcommittee and they have expressed keen interest in this bill. There were just many unavoidable conflicts with the scheduling this morning. On the minority side, there is a Republican conference and that, of course, makes it difficult for them to be here.

Mr. Chairman, my own very strong interest in this legislation is indicated by the fact that I have introduced four bills on the subject. Now, that is not a case of "on-again, off-again". There is a consistency among these four bills, and I will explain in just a moment or two the differences in them, but I have primarily supported the latest bill introduced, which is H.R. 15747.

The school teachers and other member of the professional staff of the District of Columbia educational system have not had a pay increase since 1966. Since that time, every school system in the metropolitan area has had at least one increase, and the District of Columbia school system with its present salary schedule would start the coming school year with the lowest pay scale in the entire metropolitan area.

This is a very serious problem, particularly when I imagine at this time they are in the process of trying to recruit the new teachers for the 1968-69 term.

In addition, in the other major cities of the nation, since 1966 there have been pay increases to such an extent that the District of Columbia now ranks No. 15 among the 21 largest cities in the United States, for starting salaries for teachers with the bachelor's degree, which leaves the city in a very poor competitive position with the other large cities. In addition to this unfavorable competitive position in which we now find ourselves in the District of Columbia, recruitment would be difficult even if we were competitive from a salary standpoint. It is quite difficult to recruit teachers here in the nation's capitol because such a large segment of our school population, unfortunately, come from substandard and underprivileged homes, and do not have the background of culture and discipline that they should have in the

home.

This means that our teachers must spend a large part of their time and energy in trying to maintain order and discipline, instead of teaching. Furthermore, this problem is worsened because to some extent the school children in the District of Columbia are being made the targets of the insidious propaganda of the militant black power advocates. They seek to instill in the young children their doctrine of racial hatred, resistance to authority, and contempt for law and order.

For example, all recall that just a few months ago the infamous Stokely Carmichael actually was invited to address some high school classes in the District. This is not the fault of the rank and file of the

teachers in the District of Columbia, but it is they who must face the additional burdens in their work that are caused by such that are permitted by such incredible administration.

So it is going to make it most difficult, as I have said to recruit the young, well-qualified teachers here in the Nation's Capital when we are not even in competition, salary-wise, with the schools in the suburbs.

Effective October 1, 1967, the Congress approved a pay raise for practically everyone, including the military personnel and the classified employees in the District Government, which provided a threestage increase for all District employees except policemen, firemen, professional employees of the D.C. Board of Education. We took care of the policemen and the firemen, so far as the House of Representatives is concerned, back on February 26th of this year. So now, we have the teachers and the other professional employees of the Board of Education as the only ones left. Obviously, simple justice calls for prompt action on our part on behalf of these dedicated. public servants.

And even if we bring these salaries up to a competitive level, Mr. Chairman, I think most of us would agree that the members of the teaching profession in the suburbs throughout the United States have not received their proper share of the cost of operating the community, the proper proportion of the distribution of the community's wealth. Teachers' salaries nation-wide have lagged far behind those of other professions requiring a similar amount of training and education.

I hope, Mr. Chairman, that when the Congress recognizes the element of equity and fairness involved in these measures that we are proposing, they will not be reluctant or hesitant to go along with them because of any dissatisfaction with the unfortunate action taken by some of the teachers here a few weeks ago when they engaged in a "walkout" and came up to Capitol Hill to lobby among the members of Congress to stress the need for this legislation. I want to point out, Mr. Chairman, that this was not the fault of anyone in an administrative capacity in the District Government. Certainly, the Commissioner of the District of Columbia and all his staff could not have done any more to cooperate with the school teachers and to assure them that they were aware of the problems and that within the framework of the financial limitations existing in the District of Columbia, they were going to do everything possible to get this pay bill through. The same is true of the Board of Education. It is my understanding that continuous meetings were held, and the maximum assurance given to the representatives of the teachers' union that everything possible would be done to get this bill approved by the Congress as quickly as possible.

Concern was expressed also by many Members of the Congress, including the member who is now privileged to testify. It is most unfortunate that the leader of this particular teachers' union did not understand the legislative process here nor the fact that although the Congress was sympathetic to this problem, it did take time to get this legislation through.

The chairman, as well as most of the members of this Committee, knows that the District of Columbia Education Association has for years maintained an excellent relationship with the Congress and

particularly with this Committee, and has done a magnificent job in seeing to it that the Congress did recognize the teachers' problems and in due course get appropriate legislation approved.

Now, I have heard some of our colleagues point out that they felt that they should not reward the type of activity that this recent "walkout" represents, and that they would not want to be too hasty in approving legislation because this might encourage such activity in the future. I believe that we could overcome that, Mr. Chairman, by stating in our report, that while we recognize the right of organizations and individuals to petition their government, the Congress, and to come up here and lobby, the act of actually striking or closing down the school is not the type of approach that gets legislation more rapidly, and that whatever action we are taking in regard to this legislation is solely because of the merits involved, and not because of any demonstrations or any threat that there might even be further closing of the schools in the future.

Mr. Dowdy. If the gentleman might yield. It would be my attitude that these bills would be considered on the merit and not because of any threats of strikes.

Mr. BROYHILL. Of course. I know that is the Chairman's position, and I don't want any inference drawn by anyone that that type of activity on the part of the teachers' union is going to be productive. In fact, on the contrary, it could very well be counter-productive.

Actually, Mr. Chairman, there was a large number of teachers who did not go along with that walkout. They did report for work the next day, and were very much disappointed when the schools were closed.

Mr. Dowdy. Would the gentleman yield at that point. It would be my opinion without having talked to any of them that the vast majority being dedicated teachers dedicated to the profession would resent such action on the part of the minority of their people.

Mr. BROYHILL. I understand there were absent a thousand who did come up to the Hilll that day. I regret, Mr. Chairman, that the school teachers were represented by people who do not fully understand legislative technique and the way that we must go about legislating in the Congress, and I am certain if the teachers themselves understood more fully the problems of conducting a bill properly through the legislative process, they would not support this type of leadership.

Mr. NELSEN. Would the gentleman yield at this point. What will the need be in the way of revenues if we increase the firemen, policemen, and teachers' pay-is there revenue enough to cover the increases or will legislation be necessary to provide increased revenue?

Mr. BROYHILL. I might say in answer to the question that the bill I am supporting, the one I hope that the Committee will approve. will cost an additional 15.8 million dollars per year. I have said on many previous occasions that it is my opinion that the Federal Government must furnish whatever funds are required to properly finance the operation of this Nation's Capitol, beyond the point where the economy of the District of Columbia cannot stand further taxation. I do not mean that even then we should milk them for all that we can, but I think the proper ratio is what the similar businesses and individuals pay in the suburbs. Beyond that point, I think we are going to have to increase Federal contribution.

Mr. NELSEN. Would you yield further. You recall the bind we got into in previous sessions where the Appropriations Committee delayed action on approving the D.C. budget because they have to report a balanced budget. This always came about because they awaited prior approval of revenue authorization. Wouldn't it then be necessary for us to proceed to consider revenue proposals at an early date so we do not run into a similar bind again?

Mr. BROYHILL. I think I would have to agree with what the gentle

man says.

Mr. NELSEN. Thank you for yielding.

Mr. BROYHILL. I did not mean to take this long, Mr. Chairman, but I did want to point out that there are very few basic differences in the four bills that I introduced.

The first bill, H.R. 14051, was the original proposal that was recommended by the Board of Education with the support of the District Government. Then subsequent to that, taking into consideration that a three-step pay increase had been granted the other employees of the District of Columbia Government, it was felt that it was fair to introduce a bill providing a two-step increase for school teachers. That brought about the second bill, H.R. 14526, which provided for the first step in the bill recommended by the Board of Education, and a second step, an increase of starting salaries to $7,000. This particular proposal is practically identical to the bill which has been approved by a Senate Subcommittee as an amendment to our police and firemen's pay bill. The only difference is that in their bill the first phase is retroactive to October 1 and the second stage effective next July 1. My bill was intended to be just exactly that way, but it there was a drafting error.

The third bill is practically identical to my second bill, except that in the second step, which is to become effective next July, I felt that we should do a little bit more in the area of the more experienced teachers. We know we have a problem of recruitment, and that we must do something to make it a little less difficult to get young people to come into the District of Columbia school teaching system, but we also need to be equally concerned with those who have more experience and have obtained additional training and education, and the District of Columbia Education Association advised me that we should have a little greater increase in salaries for the more experienced teachers.

I introduced my fourth bill after we had made a more substantial pay increase for the policemen and firemen. I felt for this reason that this second step proposed in my original bills should become retroactive to October 1, 1967, and that is what H.R. 16747, the bill that I hope the Committee will approve, provides.

This bill is quite similar to the one sponsored by Mr. Fraser, the gentleman from Minnesota, except that it does have little higher increases for those teachers with additional experience and training.

If the Committee and the Chairman will look very quickly at the chart showing a comparison of teachers' salaries in the District and in the suburbs Mr. Hilder prepared this at my request, I believe, so that we could compare these salary schedules-you will see that the minimum salaries, and the salaries at the top annual increment are all there, as well as the maximum salaries attainable at the top of the longevity steps. On separate sheets are the seals for the Bachelor's Degree, the Master's Degree, the Master's Degree plus 30 hours, and

the Master's Degree plus 60 hours. You will note that while these bills will, as far as the starting salary is concerned for the D.C. teachers, bring about a position of fair competition with the suburbs. When you get to the top of the annual increment on each sheet, however, you will find that the District still compares less favorably, particularly when we reach the top of the longevity steps. And this is an area in which I think we should concern ourselves. This is the reason why I am hopeful that the Committee will consider the schedule I have in H.R. 15747, which not only aid in the recruitment of young teachers, but also will help to keep these teachers after they have become more proficient by obtaining more education.

Actually, Mr. Chairman, even a teacher coming into the system at the $7,000 schedule would have to stay here for 19 years, and obtain a Doctor's Degree, or a Master's degree plus 60 hours, in order to merely double his or her salary. That is not a very aggressive scale, when a person with that many years of service and that much additional education cannot do better than merely double his income within that time. So I feel that this is the minimum that we can do in trying to improve the educational standards here in our Nation's Capitol.

Mr. Chairman, I apologize for taking more of the Committee's time than I intended, but I do feel very strongly on this subject.

Mr. Dowdy. It helps to have the information about the increased revenues. I notice that we have a report or recommendation from the Commissioner that these bills-to pay for these bills-to increase the general sales tax from 3 to 4 percent, and to eliminate the present 1 percent tax on food sales, and to increase the sales tax on liquor sales from 4 percent to 5 percent. These three together would bring an estimated income totaling $10.6 million (See p.95.)

Mr. DOWDY. Now, do you have a question, Mr. Sisk?

Mr. SISK. No question, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Dowdy. Mr. Fuqua?

Mr. FUQUA. No questions.

Mr. DowDY. Mr. Nelsen?

Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Chairman, do the provisions of the last D.C. Revenue Act that we passed, authorize adequate funds or will it be necessary to authorize additional funding? I think we should research that for the information of the Committee members, but no doubt that point will be developed as we proceed with the hearing.

Mr. WASHINGTON. I think it will

Mr. DOWDY. I am certain it will.

We have a statement of Congressman Machen, which we will insert in the record at this point.

STATEMENT OF HON. HERVEY G. MACHEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

Mr. Chairman, the President outlined a broad program for strengthening the educational system of the District of Columbia in his recent message on the State of the City. Today, the House District Committee is holding hearings on legislation which I believe is a "must" if this program is to be carried out and achieve long range success. The legislation to which I refer would provide for substantial increases in the salaries paid to District of Columbia teachers. Passage of this legislation is necessary so that the City can become more competitive with other jurisdictions in the area and throughout the country in recruiting top-notch personnel.