Page images
PDF
EPUB

Senator MARTIN. I do not think we can invade Russia. We cannot invade China. We should keep our feet on the ground, and keep the pistols greased up and plenty of ammunition for them, and some fellows that know how to shoot them—I am for that. I think that is preventive war. And I am in favor of that.

Senator GORE. Governor Peterson, to come to the problem before this committee, can you agree with Senator Kefauver that neither bill before this committee gives proper emphasis to the problem of evacuation?

Mr. PETERSON. I think that that is broadly correct, and I think that the reason for it, as I am sure Senator Kefauver would also say, is simply that we are just beginning to appreciate the complexities of civil defense, and the breadth of it and how it touches upon every phase of our life.

It has been my opinion—and I do not mean to get off the subject here, and I do not think I am—that civil defense will never work until at every level of the government, in the occupational segments of our society, and with citizens individually there is consideration of the possibility of a nuclear war. As they perform their routine duties they should project their thinking to include what must be done in that eventuality. In this business of roadbuilding, I had some little part in that for 6 years in my own State, and it certainly did not ever occur to me then that we should build roads for civil defense, even after I had set up a civil defense organization in my own State.

It is only as time goes on that we understand these things, so I would agree with the Senator; and I would think that as time goes on we must give much more consideration to these civil defense needs.

I would like to see, in whatever bill eventually comes from the committee, language broad enough to permit further work in this field, but I am not prepared today, as I indicated earlier, to suggest the number of dollars that should be placed in the bill or should be appropriated later.

My plea here today is to give consideration to the civil defense needs.
Senator GORE. Just at that point if I may ask.
Mr. PETERSON. Yes, sir.

Senator GORE. I doubt if either bill— let us leave out the doubt, neither bill does maximize the problems of evacuation. They are highway bills, not civil defense bills.

The choice that this subcommittee will have, it seems to me, is to decide whether to undertake in this bill to give proper recognition to the problem and undertake to deal with the problem of evacuation routes or whether we should direct the Bureau of Public Roads and Civil Defense Administration to make a careful study and report to the committee next year for its consideration then.

Of course, we did last year direct them and I will read section 9 to you:

In order to assure that adequate consideration is given to civil-defense aspects in the planning and construction of highways constructed or reconstructed with the aid of Federal funds, the Secretary of Commerce is authorized and directed to consult, from time to time, with the Federal Civil Defense Administrator relative to the civil-defense aspects of highways so constructed or reconstructed.

We put this provision into the law last year, and the law required that studies be presented to this committee by February 1. From time to time during these hearings, it has been indicated they would be here, but our hearings are nearing an end and those studies are not yet available to this committee.

Is it your suggestion that we nevertheless undertake to write civildefense evacuation legislation in this bill, or should we wait until studies are available to us?

Mr. PETERSON. Aside from a broad recognition of the civil-defense needs and that is in one of the bills, I believe, but it is very, very broad-I think it is a better course to wait for the study.

a I would point out that one of the limitations in our governmental procedure is that your committee included language of that nature in the law of 1954. I think that is a wise provision myself, but those things are not necessarily correlated when they get before the Appropriations Committee.

I would suggest to you that you cannot do things without money. I do not know where the responsibility for that lies, but I would assume that rests on the Bureau of Public Roads; but I have no money in my organization.

Senator GORE. Before you get to Congress, I would suggest a little correlation in the departments. We have not even received the report yet.

Senator MARTIX. Did we not make a $100,000 appropriation last year for that study?

Senator GORE. Funds were available. They were authorized.

Mr. PETERSON. We are asking for $100,000 for each of 92 cities, so $100,000 would not do what we need, as far as we are concerned.

Senator Martin. Yes; but just a kind of a general study. I have no further questions. I think the Governor has presented it very well.

I think we ought to see a very careful study made of this thing, and I think it would be better for the people. Some of these fantastic statements that have been made by Members of Congress and other folks, I just hope the American people refrain from those things.

There is no use of us getting too terribly concerned. Any kind of war is terrible.

I do not have any further questions. I think the Governor has presented it very well.

Senator GORE. You have made a fine statement, Governor. We appreciate your resopnding to our questions. Do you have anything further you would like to present?

Mr. PETERSON. I might just make one statement very briefly.

On this business of evacuation, Mr. Chairman and Senator Martin, this is one case where a governmental agency has been ahead of itself in its planning and its preparation.

We started talking about the necessity for evacuation in June 1953, knowing full well that the detection system that would give us warning could not be completed for 2 years, and it appears it is 2 years off now. Here is a case where we are making our studies and our plans 2 to 3 years ahead of time on what, I think, is the logical basis.

We have been and are doing our studying and planning and testingbecause we will have to run tests or we will condemn people needlessly to death in a wild stampede.

We still have about 2 years before evacuation is feasible, but I think we should do the study now, not the day we get the system for the warning, but rather have it ready to do before that day-not wait until the detection system is in and then spend another year and a half or 2 years getting ready to utilize it.

Senator GORE. I cannot speak for all the members of the committee, but I can speak for myself, and though I have reservations and doubts about the evacuation policies thus developed, I would not want to be arbitrary about it.

I am not as well informed as I should be. I have not studied it as you have; therefore, I would be sympathetic as an individual member of the committee toward the development of evacuation routes from the target areas; but the committee would appreciate having the benefit of the cooperative studies between the Civil Defense Administration and the Bureau of Public Roads for its guidance and help.

I wonder if you would be willing to use your good offices to try to obtain for us those studies and reports.

Mr. PETERSON. I think the attitude of the chairman and the committee is extremely sound, and I think the committee is entitled to the information.

We will do everything we can to see that you get it as rapidly as you can.

Senator Gore. Thank you, Governor. We appreciate your appearance.

Senator MARTIN. Mr. Chairman, I have a telegram here that I would like to insert in the record from Mr. Russell H. McCain, president, Association of Highway Officials of the North Atlantic States.

Senator Gore. Without objection, it will be inserted in the record at this point. (The above-mentioned document is as follows:)

TRENTON, N. J., March 8, 1955. Hon. EDWARD MARTIN,

United States Senator, Washington, D.O. Your attention is directed to the following resolution which was unanimously adopted by the Association of Highway Officials of the North Atlantic States assembled in convention at Atlantic City on March 4, 1955, which association is composed of the highway officials of the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland and the District of Columbia :

"Whereas it is apparent that the increase of motor vehicle traffic is fast outdistancing the improvement of highways at our present rate of construction, and

"Whereas military and civil defense is highly dependent upon rapid motor vehicle transportation to and from defense areas and large centers of population, and

"Whereas the completion of a properly planned highway system connecting the different States and large centers of population is needed for the economic advancement of the United States : Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Association of Highway Officials of the North Atlantic States at this 31st annual convention assembled go on record as commending the Clay committee for its comprehensive report setting forth the urgent need for speedy completion of the Interstate System of highways of the United States, and be it further

Resolred, That this association commends the aforementioned committee for pointing out that the Federal Government should assume primary responsibility for the cost of the interstate system and its urban connections."

ASSOCIATION OF HIGHWAY OFFICIALS

OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC STATES,

RUSSELL H. McCain, President. Senator GORE. The committee will be adjourned.

(Thereupon, at 11 a. m., the committee was adjourned to reconvene at 10 a. m., Monday, March 28, 1955.)

NATIONAL HIGHWAY PROGRAM

MONDAY, MARCH 28, 1955

UNITED STATES SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ROADS,

Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10:05 a. m., in room 412, Senate Office Building, Senator Stuart Symington presiding.

Present: Senators Symington (presiding), Thurmond, Neuberger, Martin, Case and Kuchel.

Senator SYMINGTON. The committee will come to order. In the absence of the chairman, Senator Gore, I told him that I would sit here temporarily in his place. It is slightly after 10, and we will start the meeting.

The committee staff has given me a list of witnesses this morning. The first witness is the Honorable Joseph Campbell, Comptroller General of the United States.

Mr. Campbell, just come right up here, please, and have a seat.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH CAMPBELL, COMPTROLLER GENERAL

OF THE UNITED STATES, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT F. KELLER, ASSISTANT TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL, AND ROBERT L. LONG, DIRECTOR OF AUDITS, GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE; AND STEPHEN P. HAYCOCK, OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL, GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator SYMINGTON. I do not know if this is or is not your first opportunity to appear on the Hill since you were confirmed as the Comptroller General.

Mr. CAMPBELL. This is my first appearance up here in my present position.

Senator SYMINGTON. I would like to offer you my congratulations for your future success, at least for the next 15 years.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the General Accounting Office appreciates the subcommittee's invitation to appear before you and give you our views with respect to S. 1160, 84th Congress, which would create a Federal Highway Corporation for financing the construction of the National System of Interstate Highways.

In the opinion of the General Accounting Office, one of the most important aspects of the legislation is the proposed method of financing

a

the highway construction. The bill would create a new Government corporation to be known as the Federal Highway Corporation.

The Corporation would be authorized to issue obligations not to exceed $21 billion. These obligations would be sold to the general public and, in addition, could be purchased by the United States from fiduciary, trust, and public funds, the investment or deposit of which is under the authority and control of the United States.

We feel that the proposed method of financing is objectionable because the result would be that the borrowings would not be included in the public debt obligations of the United States.

While the issuance of the Corporation's bonds would be with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury and the obligations would be repaid from the permanent appropriation established by section 105 (c), the obligations would specifically state that they are not obligations of, or guaranteed by, the United States.

However, the legislation provides that the Secretary of the Treasury may advance to the Corporation in any fiscal year an amount not in excess of the estimated appropriation for that year and, in addition, the Corporation would be authorized to borrow from the Secretary of the Treasury not to exceed $5 billion outstanding at any one time.

Both of these provisions coupled with the permanent appropriation would apparently be to assure the investors of ability to meet obligations, and tend to have the effect of a Government guaranty of the highway obligations, at least in the minds of the investing public.

As a practical matter, the obligations would be moral and equitable obligations of the United States, since they would be issued by a Corporation entirely owned by the Government.

While the obligations would specifically provide that they are not guaranteed by the Government, it is highly improbable that the Congress could allow such obligations to go in default when one considers that credit standing of the Federal Government would be involved.

In addition, the Corporation's activities would not be self-sustaining. It would have no substantial revenues, and funds for paying off the obligations would come from the general fund of the Treasury. The funds available would be measured by future anticipated increases in collections of taxes on gasoline and special fuels.

The fact that the bill provides for a permanent appropriation measured by gasoline taxes does not, in our opinion, establish revenues for the Corporation in any normal use of the term.

The gasoline taxes are revenues of the Treasury and go into the general fund of the Treasury. The appropriation provided would come out of the general fund of the Treasury exactly as most of the appropriations made by Congress.

The total amount of borrowings by the Corporation would amount to the very substantial sum of $21 billion and, in our opinion, would be borrowings of the United States Government, irrespective of the terminology applied. It seems only right that such obligations should be considered, classified, and disclosed as a part of the total borrowings of the Government; that is, the public debt.

It is our opinion that the Government should not enter into financing arrangements which might have the effect of obscuring the financial facts of the Government's debt position. We believe that the highway program since it, in reality, is nonrevenue producing-should be financed by appropriations made by the Congress.

« PreviousContinue »