Millions of dollars could be used in Pennsylvania alone during the first year for such a program. I am sure sizable amounts could be so employed in West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, and almost every Applachian State.

I urge you to make this program effective now, this year, by authorizing more money for immediate use.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Governor Scranton.

I would wish at this time to have the record reflect the very helpful and vigorous support which was given to this legislation by two of its cosponsors, Senators Clark and Scott. I recall that during our debate in the Senate, Senator Scott took occasion to properly commend you, Governor Scranton, on your leadership in this program, and it is further evidenced today by not just your general comment, but by your very specific attention to one of these problems; namely, the reclaiming of the scarred lands of the Appalachian region by a program which could be placed in effect immediately.

The need for such effort certainly is imperative, and I am sure that the members of this committee will study very carefully the proposed amendments, and will also keep in mind the challenge which you have presented to the committee to move very promptly in this area of reclaiming of our lands.

Senator Scott has talked with me in recent days about the many needs of the areas to be covered in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and I am very sure that you have done your preplanning in Pennsylvania.

Is that true?

Governor SCRANTON. It is, sir. We have actually had very strong activity in this particular field, too.

As you know, I served in the House of Representatives briefly, and I do know some of the trials and tribulations of getting bills through Congress. I want to state openly, and I have said this many times before, that in my short experience with legislation in the national Congress I have never known any in which the people were so genuinely interested as you are, and Senator Scott and Senator Cooper and others, and likewise many Members of the House, together with the key people in the administration, in the Interior, and in the Commerce Department, and at the White House, have been so interested in suggesting and have been so helpful in trying to get them so that we would be united in our support of this very important and immediate bill, I hope.

And I want to pay due honor and may I say very great gratitude to all of the people so involved, because I think it has been a very wonderful experience.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Governor Scranton.

I would like to note the presence today in the audience of former Representative James Van Zandt, of Pennsylvania. I know of his very real interest in moving this program forward.

Senator Muskie?

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you, Senator Randolph.

Governor, What is your view as to the reasons for giving this kind of special attention to all of one State and parts of several others, 11 in all?

Governor SCRANTON. Briefly, Senator, I suppose it goes back to basic theory as to how you answer the problem of unemployment.

My basic theory, which, incidentally, we have tried to put into practice in Pennsylvania, is in generally nationally good times that there is no common denominator to the unemployment problem across the Nation as a whole, other than the basic problems of education, and that kind of thing.

You have different problems in different areas which create the unemployment that is there, and each area, normally smaller areas than this, incidentally, should be studied closely to make sure what it is that will solve these problems, and then come up with solutions.

We have been doing that on what I call a pinpointing basis in the State of Pennsylvania. There are, however, in the area of Appalachia actual common denominators, which are prevalent throughout the area. The entire area lacks access, so to speak, from the standpoint of transportation and communication.

The highway problem in the mountainous areas of Appalachia is an acute one, and this has created very heavy pockets of unemployment in small villages, in small towns, that are very hard to get to, and very hard to get out of. There is very little transportation facility.

Consequently, for example, the highway program in this Appalachian program seems to me particularly well fitted to this particular problem, and a real solution.

Secondly, the area, too, has the common denominator of having been materially almost identical. It is all ridges and mountains and that kind of area. Therefore it is particularly attractive for tourism, and for that kind of promotion, and as a result, the beautification of the area, and making sure that it maintains itself as such, is extremely important.

Third, it has the common denominator which we have put into this bill, namely, the coal problems and vestiges of an abandoned mining area. This, too, is a very potent force in creating unemployment in the area.

Last, but by no means least, and I have not covered all the things, it also has the very basic common denominator of water resources which are acute in the area and strong, and if used could be very important, but if polluted, will not only cause further unemployment, but continue and perpetuate that which is already there.

In brief, what I am saying to you is that my personal opinion is that you solve unemployment in nationally generally good times by trying to solve a specific problem in a specific area normally smaller than this, but this particular area has these four common denominators, and we can apply direct solutions to them, and that is what we are trying to do.

Senator MUSKIE. I know Senator Hart in his testimony this morning set out the following criteria in his proposal for meeting the upper Great Lakes problem:

One:

We find that both have been bypassed by major transportation arteries and have been essentially isolated from the commerce and economic growth of other regions in these States.

This you have just touched upon. The second is:

Both Appalachia and the Upper Great Lakes have suffered substantial outmigration of population * *.

Third:

The overall educational attainment in the Upper Great Lakes counties is substantially below that of the Nation and adjoining parts of the three States. Next, that

Our economy was largely based on the exploitation of vast timber and highgrade iron ore resources.

Again, he points out the similarity of economic history.

Would you say, Governor, that any area which meets similar criteria ought to have similar treatment?

Governor SCRANTON. I would say this to you, that any area that has a consistent and a persistent undereconomy from the national level, and has a common denominator which creates this unemployment and causes it to be perpetuated, I think this would be a fair subject for investigation for this committee.

I do not want to comment, which is out of my privilege, perhaps, but I did listen to Senator Hart's testimony, and I am familiar with the Upper Peninsula and its problems, and I would say that this is a logical area for somewhat the same type of treatment.

Senator MUSKIE. I do not know this area in as detailed a way as you gentlemen who live in it, but would it be fair to say that there are pockets of prosperity in the area covered by this bill?

Governor SCRANTON. In comparison to the Nation as a whole, there are a few.

For example, Senator Randolph is much more familiar with this than I am, the city of Charleston is doing relatively well, although the State as a whole is considerably below the national average.

In Pennsylvania in the last couple of years we have been fortunate to build up some of these areas. For example, the city of Pittsburgh now, due a good deal to the comeback of the steel industry, is a good deal better off than it has been. Nevertheless, these have been areas of persistent economic problems over a long period of time.

Frankly, if you want to get an economic study out-and I am sure the committee has them-these go back to as early in some instances as 1927, and have been consistently so ever since, particularly in eastern Kentucky, in West Virginia, and in parts of Pennsylvania. And these common denominators have been there since that time.

Senator MUSKIE. How do you justify including these pockets of prosperity in this kind of a program?

Governor SCRANTON. I do not mean to indicate that they are, at least I hope they are not, temporary prosperous places, but, relatively speaking, these are few in population, not great in number.

Senator MUSKIE. Actually, these relatively mild areas can be very useful as catalytic agents. Is that not so?

Governor SCRANTON. They could be. You cannot very well take a gographic area of the United States and not find some place that is doing well, but generally speaking, this area is having great trouble.

Senator MUSKIE. I ask you these questions, Governor, because there are areas in my State afflicted with problems very like these which concern you gentlemen, and I think we both share the belief that there is a responsibility for Government to deal with such problems. I think it is useful for us as we consider your problem to lay down criteria in

these hearings which we can fall back upon as we press for assistance and help and programs to help our area. I appreciate your comments. Governor SCRANTON. I think I recognize that, Senator, and I know the problems Maine has had with the change in the textile industry and so forth.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Senator.

I recall that Senator McNamara, chairman of the Public Works Committee, in his speech to the AFL-CIO Legislative Conference on January 12, discussed in similar terms the viewpoint which has been expressed here by Senator Muskie on these problems, and declared that we must move quickly with a coherent and effective approach to meet these problems. Senator McNamara appropriately referred to such a program as part 2 of the war on poverty.

Senator Cooper.

Senator COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that we welcome Governor Scranton here today, and appreciate very much his forthright and valuable testimony

I may say I have hailed you on other occasions, and I hail you here today.

Governor SCRANTON. Thank you, sir.

Senator COOPER. Senator Muskie raised a question which was raised in the debate last year, on the floor of the Senate, and which was discussed in the adverse views about this legislation both in the House and the Senate. The point of this question is that there are prosperous, or at least fairly prosperous, counties and communities also included in the Appalachian area.

After this legislation is passed, the Commission will be established, and it will be made up of the Governors or their delegates and representatives of the Federal Government. I ask you, as one who will be a member of that Commission, or who will delegate someone to be a member, is it correct that the Commission will take into account in its recommendations these variations in the Appalachian region between the poverty-stricken counties and the more prosperous counties?

Governor SCRANTON. Not only is that true, sir, but in the projects specifically outlined in the legislation and appendixes appended thereto there are plans, as you know, for the areas that are not

prosperous.

For example, the setup that has come up with the work with the U.S. Bureau of Roads and with the State highway departments are almost all in the areas of particular need in the region; likewise with regard to the immediate projects in the coal mining area, projects that we have in mind; likewise with the water resources.

I must say in all honesty that, except indirectly, the aid in this particular program as so far outlined will not directly benefit Charleston and Pittsburgh, but they will certainly indirectly do so, because it will make the areas around them so much more viable.

Senator COOPER. This consideration has particular reference to the section of the bill which provides for road construction.

Governor SCRANTON. That is correct.

Senator COOPER. Of course, in the development of a road network in this area, I think it will be inevitable in some cases that a road will pass through more prosperous counties.

Governor SCRANTON. That is correct.

Senator COOPER. That would have to occur in order to make these presently inaccessible areas accessible to larger and more prosperous communities. This approach would also apply in that section which deals with the development of multicounty health facilities and hospitals.

Governor SCRANTON. The accentuation is all on the rural areas, and I think primarily should be.

Senator COOPER. The inclusion of a county which is more prosperous would of course give strength and help to the less prosperous counties. Governor SCRANTON. Correct.

Senator COOPER. I would like to ask about your proposals on strip mining, because I may say that I think this section is in the bill largely because of your recommendation.

Governor SCRANTON. And the President's very firm approval, sir. Senator COOPER. And also this committee's approval.

Has the State of Pennsylvania enacted legislation which prescribes standards for the operation of strip mines, and conditions for the reclamation of strip mine areas by private owners?

Governor SCRANTON. Yes, sir. We have what has been termed "model legislation" in this field, which was passed in 1963, with, incidentally, the overwhelming approval of most of the members of both parties of our legislature.

This is very strict regulatory action indeed. It demands the return of all present operating or future operating strip mine activities in the area to contour, and then this is presided over by a board of reclamation which sees to it, and has the enforcement.

We have also upped considerably the demands for money that must be placed in escrow for this purpose, before any activity begins.

We have had a great deal of interest in this very strict regulation, and program, from your State, sir, and from Senator Randolph's and some others, and literally from foreign nations, too. I think it is model legislation, and it is working very well.

Senator COOPER. Then your recommendation for authorization for strip mine reclamation, as I understand it, would deal with those areas which are beyond private help, such as abandoned strip mines and fires, and with public lands.

Governor SCRANTON. The specific amendment which I believe the Senators are introducing deals first of all with national lands, and secondly with State lands, and thirdly with areas that are on private land but have public access.

It is not including every piece of private land. Frankly, I think this would be difficult to do at first flush, until we can make sure that legally the others will work as they have in our State, where we have employed them.

Senator CooPER. I know when Governor Scranton was in the House he urged and supported the development of this bill, as well as many other bills which affect these depressed areas.

I am very glad that you have testified before us today.

Governor SCRANTON. Thank you, Senator.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Senator Cooper.

Senator Fong.

Senator FONG. Thank you, Senator Randolph.