section 407 of the National Housing Act becomes applicable and that subsection provides that the insurance terminate immediately but the association is obligated to pay premium charges for insurance for a period of 3 years. It would seem to me, based upon my analysis, that the above provision gives the Insurance Corporation the arbitrary power of termination of insurance apart from and in addition to the power now given it in subsection (b) of section 407 of the National Housing Act, which provides that the Insurance Corporation has the power to terminate the insured status of any insured institution at any time, after 90 days' notice in writing; however, only for violation of provisions of the National Housing Act or any rule or regulation made thereunder or any agreement made pursuant to section 403 of the National Housing Act. If subsection (b) of section 407 of the National Housing Act also governs the power of termination as proposed under section 502 of S. 866, then I am puzzled as to why this provision should be injected into said section 502, which is primarily intended to give the right of conversion to Federal associations. I feel that the above provisions of section 502, to which I am objecting and protest, if allowed to become law will nullify the will of the shareholders and the freedom of choice of charter under which they wish to operate. I feel very strongly that the provisions of section 502, because of the provisions to which I object, cast a reflection upon States' rights, the charters issued thereunder, and the ability and sincerity of State supervisors as faithful public servants. Our National Association of State Supervisors, representing 38 States, including the Territory of Hawaii, has given much thought to this question of reciprocal rights of conversion and has discussed it time after time with the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration since 1934. We approved a draft providing for conversion of Federal associations to State associations at our national conference held in St. Paul last November and this draft is identical to the draft approved by the United States Savings and Loan League. For your information, the United States Savings and Loan League is the trade organization of the savings and loan industry and its membership at this time includes 3,508 Federal and State associations in the United States and its territories. That membership represents an estimated 80 to 90 percent of the total assets of all associations in the United States, which assets are now above $10,000,000,000. The draft referred to above and which we recommend for amendment of section 502 of S. 866 is as follows: "Any Federal savings and loan association may convert itself into a savings and loan, building and loan, or homestead association, or cooperative bank, incorporated under the laws of the State, District, or Territory in which the principal office of such association is located (hereinafter referred to as the State institution, upon the vote cast at a legal meeting specified by the law of such State, District, or Territory as required for such a conversion, but in no event less than 51 percent of all votes cast at such meeting, voting in person or by proxy: Provided further, That legal titles are protected by such conversion or provided that conveyances of legal titles are made. If none of the outstanding shares of the converting Federal association are held by the Secretary of the Treasury or the Home Owners' Loan Corporation, and if such conversion is to a State institution, which is mutual in character and of a type which has been insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, no approval of such conversion by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board or the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration shall be required and such converted institution shall continue to be an insured institution and bound under all of the agreements contained in the original application for insurance of accounts, and by such conversion shall accept and be bound by all agreements required by section 403 of title IV of the National Housing Act and such insured institution shall upon such conversion and thereafter be authorized to issue securities in the form theretofore approved by Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation for issuance by similar insured institutions in such State, District, or Territory. Such conversion shall be effective upon approval by the duly constituted authorities of the State, District, or Territory which have supervision over such institutions where such institution is located, and the filing of a certified copy of the resolution authorizing such conversion and the approval of such State, District, or Territory authority with the Federal Home Loan Bank Administraton or the Federal Home Loan Bank Board. "In addition to the foregoing provision for conversion upon a vote of the members only an association chartered as a Federal savings and loan association, including any having outstanding shares held by the Secretary of the Treasury or the Home Owners' Loan Corporation, may convert itself into a State institu tion upon an equitable basis, subject to approval, by regulations or otherwise, by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board or the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration and by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation: Provided, That if the insurance of accounts is terminated in connection with such conversion, the notice and other action shall be taken as provided by law and regulations for the termination of insurance of accounts." I will greatly appreciate any help you can give which will bring this matter before the Banking and Currency Committee of the Senate. I am also writing Senators Johnson and Millikin, of Colorado. Very truly yours, A. O. JOHNSON, Building and Loan Commissioner. WAR HOUSING CENTER OF THE EMERGENCY HOUSING COMMITTEE, HOUSING FOR VETERANS, Louisville 2, Ky., March 27, 1947. Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: More than 12,000 veterans in Louisville, Ky., are seeking housing for their families. More than 4,600 has been classified as distress cases. The War Housing Center has been at the heart of the housing situation in Louisville, Ky., for 5 years and knows conditions. In 1946, 3,064 priorities were issued for new single-family houses, but less than 1,500 houses were completed. The rate of issuance of permits in 1947 is practically the same and the rate of completions about the same. The supply of housing is desperately inadequate. Even more tragic is the fact that what is being produced is practically all for sale and not for rent. It does not fit the demand. Ninety percent of our veterans are in no financial position to buy homes and should not be forced to buy. Private builders will not not produce rental units at present building costs. The best remedy for the present desperate situation, as I see it, is the passage of Senate bill 866, known as the Taft-Ellender-Wagner bill. This would make possible rental housing for veterans at rents they could afford to pay. Results in veterans' housing programs have been pathetically inadequate to date. The Taft-Ellender-Wagner bill comes to grips with realities of the situation and should be passed. Please incorporate this statement into the record. Sincerely yours, MARGARET P. WILSON. NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN, INC., The Honorable CHARLES W. TOBEY, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. SIR: Enclosed you will find testimony submitted by the National Council of Jewish Women in support of S. 866 which we would like included in the record of your committee's hearings. Respectfully yours, Mrs. JOSEPH M. WELT, TESTIMONY ON S. 866, THE NATIONAL HOUSING COMMISSION BILL, BEFORE THE SENATE BANKING AND CURRENCY COMMITTEE At its national convention in November the National Council of Jewish Women, recognizing the urgent need to end the housing shortage, voted to "urge the extension of National, State, and local housing programs in urban and rural areas." In support of this resolution, the National Council of Jewish Women wishes to go on record urging immediate passage of S. 866. Eighteen months have passed since the war ended, and the crisis in housing has increased rather than lessened. Families of four and six are living in quarters suited to no more than two persons. This situation is antagonistic to our high standard of living; it creates bitterness and dissatisfaction; it is an unhealthy situation which requires an immediate remedy. Throughout the war, and in these many months since its conclusion, the building industry has voiced its faith in its ability to do the job alone. It has had 18 months in which to prove the validity of its claims. Those months have seen only the most meager building, and that not only insufficient in quantity but unsuited to the major need, which is for low-rent units. Most of the building which has been done has been for sale at prices far out of reach of the average pocket. The past year and a half has proved that private industry alone is not capable of meeting the vast needs which exist in the field of housing. Government help is required if we are to remedy our present desperate housing plight within a reasonable time. We cannot afford to wait the 5 or more years which would be required for private industry, acting alone, to make even a dent in the terrible housing shortage. The Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill, S. 866, provides the Government aid which will enable private enterprise to end our housing crisis in short order. S. 866, the National Housing Commission bill, proposes a plan whereby the facilities of the Government will be available to private enterprise so that it can expand its activities to encompass the existing need. By strengthening the home loan bank and Federal Housing Administrations, by broadening the provisions of the FHA system to enable private enterprise to serve middle income families, and by providing for a special program of yield insurance to be administered by the FHA to encourage direct investment by large-scale investors in rental housing for families of moderate income, S. 866 makes a direct attack on the most pressing problem, the need for low-rent housing, and provides for its solution. In its provision for the resumption of the pubic low-rent housing and slum clearance program, S. 866 is attempting to provide for those whose income is so low that private enterprise will be unable to build for them even with the aid provided in the rest of the bill. We are well aware of the degrading effects that slums have on those who inhabit them. If the United States is to continue to prosper and to raise its standard of well-being, we must see to it that slums are eliminated. As a way of coordinating the housing program and providing the over-all direction which will expedite its enactment, S. 866 provides for a National Housing Commission to be headed by an Administrator, and a Coordinating Council composed of the Administrator and the heads of other Government agencies concerned with various aspects of housing. In its present form, the bill gives the Administrator only the power of coordination over the other agencies on the Coordinating Council. It is our belief that the entire program would be strengthened if the Housing Administrator were given final directive power over the other agencies so that there would be an end to conflicting and unrelated decisions with regard to housing. In conclusion, it must constantly be kept in mind that more than a year and a half has passed since the war ended with no relief to the housing shortage in sight. There is no more time for delay. It is urgent that S. 866 be passed immediately so that we can start work on the houses which are needed so desperately. NEW JERSEY STATE COUNCIL OF AMERICAN FEDERATION OF Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY, Chairman, Senate Banking Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: The membership of this council notes that your committee is preparing to report to the Senate on the National Housing Commission bill, S. 866. Because the critical housing shortage is seriously affecting our members, and the community as a whole, we urgently request a favorable report on this bill. We feel that this legislation proposes practical means for immediately initiating action to overcome this growing housing problem, and we earnestly request that this legislation be passed by Congress as quickly as possible. Very truly yours, FREDERICK H. EITEL, President. TEMPLE SHOLOM SISTERHOOD, Senator CHARLES TOBEY, Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Temple Sholom Sisterhood with a membership of 1,800 women wishes to express to you its concern that the Taft-Ellender-Wagner bill be approved by the Senate Banking and Currency Committee without delay. We believe that it is necessary that the bill be gotten onto the floor of the Senate and passed by the body quickly. It is vital to our American people that the comprehensive housing program covered in this bill be set into operation. Sincerely Yours, Mrs. WILLIAM B. LEVY, President, Temple Sholom Sisterhood. Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY.. ROCHESTER 7, N. Y., March 27, 1947. Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: Will you kindly register my protest against the enactment of the Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill into our national picture? The builders of this country, operating under free enterprise, have been able to house our people in conditions which surpass those in any other country in the world. Why, with that condition existing, it is necessary for the Government to step in and undertake to do the job is beyond all comprehension. If men in your position can only get back to fundamentals of good Government without all the political implications from groups already in the Government, we feel there should result a far more democratic form of life in the one spot left on this earth where it has a chance to survive. Public housing, once the seed is sown, knows no bounds. DANIEL W. FRAYSIER. GLENDALE 2, CALIF., March 27, 1947. Hon. CHARLES W. TOBEY, Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR SIR: As president of the Glendale-Burbank chapter of the Building Contractors Association of California and speaking on the members' behalf as well as my own, I ask that you do everything in your power to defeat the WagnerEllender-Taft bill, S. 866. It is our belief and the belief of all the people petitioning us for housing, that governmental or socialized housing as sponsored by this bill is undesirable and not the answer to the housing shortage problem. The FHA title 608 proposition is stimulating the building of more desirable, smaller rental units. A governmental building program would corner the available building materials and stop private as well as title 608 building. EUGENE M. MILLER. WILLIAMS & BURROWS, INC., Burlingame, Calif., March 24, 1947. Re: Your deliberations on revised Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill, designated as bill No. S. 866. Senator CHARLES W. TOBEY, Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: It seems a waste of your time and of taxpayers' money to have to go through this Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill business again. The revised bill does not appreciably change the bill which was attempted last year. It seems unworkable to attempt to group together all of the theories that appear to be behind this legislation in one omnibus bill and secure a result that will accomplish one purpose without overwhelming cost in other directions. An argument frequently heard is that it will get more housing for veterans. All available building labor and all available materials are presently being employed in construction of veterans' housing over the country. How in the world can this piece of legislation increase the number of construction workers or increase the number of square feet of gypsum wallboard? That argument just doesn't hold water. Answers to some of the other arguments made for the bill similarly indicate the shallowness of most of those arguments. I believe you will find a great majority of the taxpaying private citizens of the frame of mind that the bill should not become law and that, if there are any portions of the bill that represent desirable legislation, such portions should be made to stand on their own merits as separate bills for separate studies. Respectfully yours, F. F. BURROWS. MAYOR'S EMERGENCY HOUSING COMMITTEE, Re S. 866, Taft-Ellender-Wagner bill. Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: The housing situation in Louisville both for veterans and other citizens is tragic. 4,000 renters in the middle and lower income group were evicted in the last 2 years by the sale of the home they could not buy. 12,000 families are seeking a home. Of these, 9,000 are veterans. 4,500 veterans are in desperate need, living in quarters so overcrowded that the situation has become a health menace. The vacancy ratio of houses for rent is right at zero. We feel that the passage of the Taft-Ellender-Wagner bill is the only hope for relief in this situation. We believe it will produce both rental homes and homes for sale for those who need it most. We cannot afford to listen to selfish interests at this time. We urge that you do everything possible to secure a favorable report on this bill, and also its passage by the Senate and the House at the earliest possible moment. We would appreciate it if you would have this statement incorporated in the record of the hearings. Sincerely yours, N. H. DOSKER, Chairman, Mayor's Emergency Housing Committee. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL LAW OFFICERS, The Honorable CHARLES W. TOBEY, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TOBEY: On December 20, 1945, the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers presented two statements to the Senate Banking and Currency Committee supporting S. 1592, the Wagner-Ellender-Taft general housing bill of the Seventy-ninth Congress. These statements were presented on our behalf by Lt. Comdr. Philip H. Hill, our special consultant on housing, and City Attorney Walter J. Mattison, Milwaukee, Wis. In connection with the present hearings which you are conducting on S. 688, it is the desire of this organization to reaffirm its support of this legislation. We would like to file with your committee for its consideration the enclosed statements, which are those presented at the hearings in the Seventy-ninth Congress. We also would like to file the enclosed copy of the resolution adopted at our annual conference on December 4, 1946, endorsing the principles of the Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill. It has come to my attention by telegrams and letters from city attorneys throughout the Nation that the opponents of S. 688 have appeared before your committee and have presented rather voluminous testimony. I am personally afraid that this situation might create an untrue picture of the support for the bill. I find among city officials a unanimous feeling that adoption of this legislation is essential to the future housing needs of metropolitan areas. Perhaps I should have come to Washington to express this in testimony before your |