I believe that law should be based on fact and reason, not on some fixed assumption dreamt up by a statistically inclined bureaucrat. Let me repeat: the remedy proposed in section 107 of the bill before your committee is no remedy at all. It undercuts the basic principle of local responsibility. It provides a time-consuming, expensive, and cumbersome procedure. And it tries to jam human behavior into a statistical trap. H.R. 9168 PROVIDES A SOUND APPROACH Members of the committee, we have a problem on our hands, and this problem will not be solved by the proposal suggested in the administration's bill. I would, therefore, strongly recommend that your committee substitute, in place of section 107, the text of H.R. 9168, the bill which I introduced several months ago. This bill, in my opinion, reflects a sound approach. It leaves responsibility where it should be-in the hands of local authorities who are fully competent to deal with abuses if the Federal Government would not prevent them, as it does today, from doing it. It does not create a cumbersome procedure which could only result in increased bureaucracy, ineffectual help to the recipients of aid to families with dependent children, and additional expense to the taxpayer. And it does not try to statistically predetermine human frailties. CONCLUSION Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I would like to repeat what I said earlier: We cannot continue to condone the paradox of a Federal law which has a specific purpose, but which is administered in such a way that its purpose cannot be implemented. We have a program of aid to families of dependent children, and funds provided under this program should be spent for the welfare and needs of these children. They should not be spent for other unrelated and sometimes unwise purposes. It is our responsibility to see that these funds are spent for the purpose for which they are provided. My bill, H.R. 9168, may not provide the complete or the best solution to the problem at hand. But I believe that it is a step in the right direction. The course of action it proposes has been officially endorsed last year by the Wisconsin State Legislature, by the Milwaukee County Board of Supevisors, and by other local welfare authorities. I earnestly commend it to your committee's careful consideration. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Our next witness is our colleague from California, the Honorable John F. Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin we appreciate your taking time to come to the committee this morning; and you are recognized, sir. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. BALDWIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mr. BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have distributed, I believe, to all members of the committee a proposed amendment, together with three supporting letters, and I would like unanimous consent to have that inserted in the record at the beginning of my testimony. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection it will be included in the record. (The material referred to above follows:) PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 152 ON PAGE 67 OF H.R. 10032 SUBMITTED BY CONGRESSMAN JOHN F. BALDWIN OF CALIFORNIA "Section 152 should be revised to read as follows: "Section 152(a) clause (2) of section 408(a) of the Social Security Act is amended to read "(2) for whose placement and care the State or local agency administering the State plan approved under section 402, or any other local public agency either supervised by the State agency administering or supervising the administration of such State plan or authorized to place and supervise dependent children under the laws of the State, is responsible." (b) Clause (2) of section 408(f) of the Social Security Act is amended to read “(2) use by the State or local agency administering the State plan, to the maximum extent practicable, in placing such a child in a foster family home, of the services of employees, of the State public welfare agency referred to in section 522(a) (relating to allotments to States for child welfare services under pt. 3 of title V) or of any local agency participating in the administration of the plan referred to in such section, who performs functions in the administration of such plan, or of the services of employees of any other local public agency authorized to place and supervise dependent children under the laws of the State." (c) The last sentence of section 408 of such act is amended by inserting before the period at the end thereof "or has been approved, by the State public welfare agency, referred to in section 522 ( a ), as meeting the standards established by such agency for foster family homes." Hon. JOHN F. BALDWIN, CHAMBERS OF JUDGE OF SUPERIOR Court, Representative in Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. BALDWIN: It has been called to your attention that last year Congress passed a law which makes possible Federal participation in aid to needy children grants to children in foster homes. This is Public Law 87-31. We further understand that the law is presently being interpreted in such a way that juvenile court wards in foster homes under the supervision of the probation department would not be eligible. We understand that the present interpretation is that in order for the grant to include Federal funds, the juvenile court wards would have to be placed under the supervision of the welfare department. It is our considered opinion that the receipt of Federal funds to help these children should not require commitment to the welfare department. We feel that the juvenile court is in the best position to determine what agency should supervise the children. We prefer to use an agency under the control of the courts. We understand the present law expires in June but will undoubtedly be repassed. We would appreciate your attempting to amend the law so that the Federal funds can also be obtained for wards in foster homes supervised by the probation department. In addition to authorizing Federal funds for welfare placements, the amendment could include Federal funds for children placed by any governmental agency authorized to place and supervise dependent children under the laws of any State. As you no doubt know, our probation department places and supervises all juvenile court wards in placement, as do several other large probation departments in California. Sincerely yours, HOMER W. PATTERSON, Superior Court Judge, Department 1. Superior Court Judge, Department 2. Superior Court Judge, Department 4. Superior Court Judge, Department 5. Superior Court Judge, Department 6. Superior Court Judge, Department 7. Hon. ABRAHAM A. RIBICOFF, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., November 24, 1961. Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, DEAR MR. RIBICOFF: I am writing to you for an interpretation under Public Law 87-31, passed by the 87th Congress on May 8, 1961. Section 2 of this act added a new section 408 under title IV of the Social Security Act. Section 408 prescribes conditions under which aid to needy children funds can be paid where children are put in foster homes. In Contra Costa County, Calif., the usual procedure whereby children are placed in foster homes is as follows: A child is first made a ward of the juvenile court and the child is then placed in a foster home by the county probation department at the direction of the juvenile court. It is my understanding of the intent of Congress that such children are also intended to qualify for Federal grants according to the terms of Public Law 87-31. However, I have been requested by the Contra Costa County Probation Office to obtain an advisory opinion from your office on this point. Will you, therefore, please let me know whether a dependent child who has been placed in a foster home by the county probation department at the direction of the juvenile court can qualify for a Federal grant of aid to needy children funds according to the terms of Public Law 87-31? Sincerely yours, JOHN F. BALDWIN, THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, Hon. JOHN F. BALDWIN, DEAR Mr. BALDWIN: This is in reply to your letter requesting an interpretation of section 408 of the Social Security Act, as amended by section 2 of Public Law 87-31. You advise that under procedures used in Contra Costa County, Calif., a child is first made a ward of the juvenile court and the child is then placed in a foster home by the county probation department at the direction of the juvenile court. You asked if such a child can qualify for a Federal grant of aid to needy children funds according to the terms of section 408. Payments with respect to the child who has been placed in a foster home under the conditions which you have described would not meet the requirements for Federal financial participation in the aid to dependent children program. Section 408 (a) (2) sets forth as one of the conditions for Federal participation in foster care payments that the responsibility for the placement and care of the child who has been judicially removed from his home be in "the State or local agency administering the State plan approved under section 402." Under the California law and the approved State plan, the administration of the program for dependent children in Contra Costa County is in the Contra Costa County Social Service Department, not the county probation office. It seems clear, therefore, that the condition in section 408(a) (2) would be met only if the county social service department is given responsibility for placement and care of the child. Sincerely, ABE RIBICOFF. Mr. Chairman, the only changes made by this amendment are in the words that are underlined as compared to the section 152 which appears in the bill that is now pending before the committee, H.R. 10032, and the reason I am submitting this amendment, Mr. Chairman, is the law as it is presently interpreted by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare only makes possible the payment of aid to needy children when a child is placed in a foster home if the placement has been made by the Welfare Department. Now, in the State of California in the counties I represent and in many of the other major counties, as Mr. King, I am sure, knows, the placement is made by the juvenile court with the actual agency working with the juvenile court being the probation department. I have corresponded with Mr. Ribicoff asking if the placement by the juvenile court and the probation department would qualify under the existing law, and Mr. Ribicoff has indicated, no, it would not; and, Mr. Chairman, the second letter which I have attached to this correspondence that I have put before you is my letter dated November 24 to Mr. Ribicoff, in which I have asked him the specific question, and I would like to quote my first paragraph: I am writing to you for an interpretation under Public Law 87-31, passed by the 87th Congress on May 8, 1961. Section 2 of this act added a new section 408 under title IV of the Social Security Act. Section 408 prescribes conditions under which aid to needey children funds can be paid where children are put in foster homes. In Contra Costa County, Calif., the usual procedure whereby children are placed in foster homes is as follows: “A child is first made a ward of the juve nile court and the child is then placed in a foster home by the county probation department at the direction of the juvenile court." Then I asked him the question as to whether this would qualify under the provisions of the act and the letter from Mr. Ribicoff is the third letter I have attached, dated February 1, and it says: Dear Mr. Baldwin: and he refers to my letter and then says: Payments with respect to the child who has been placed in a foster home under the conditions which you have described would not meet the requirements for Federal financial participation in the aid-to-dependent-children program. The first letter I have attached, Mr. Chairman, is a letter from all seven superior court judges in Contra Costa County, a county of over 400,000 people, who point out, and I would like to quote: It is our considered opinion that the return of welfare funds to help these children should not require commitment to the welfare department. We feel that the juvenile court is in the best position to determine what agency should supervise the children. We prefer to use an agency under the control of the court. Then in their final paragraph they say: As you no doubt know, our probation department places and supervises all juvenile court wards in placement, as do several other large probation departments in California. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would not prevent anything that is now being done under the law passed last year. In other words, the amendment would allow the continuation of the welfare department procedure. All it would do would be to allow an alternate procedure that if the placement is made by any authorized public agency, authorized to place and supervise dependent children under the laws of the State, the children would qualify for aid to needy children funds when placed in a foster home. I am sure that it was not the intention of Congress to bar children placed in foster homes by a juvenile court procedure, which is an established procedure in our State, and I am sure in many other States, from receiving aid to dependent children, so this is the reason for this proposed amendment, simply to allow this alternate procedure, making it possible for the courts to continue to follow juvenile court placement procedure as an alternate to placement through a welfare department. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions of Mr. Baldwin? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. ALGER. I would like to comment, Mr. Chairman. I have had the opportunity to speak with our colleague, Mr. Baldwin, on this amendment and, knowing the care that we have exercised in this committee, over the time I have been on it at least, not to coerce the States any more than we have to and conform to Federal law, it seems to me that the spirit of his amendment is certainly in keeping with what Secretary Ribicoff, and I think the Department would like to adopt. I certainly want to add my support to this thought and hope that we will take it up further in the committee later on. Mr. BALDWIN. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. King? Mr. KING. I can assure you, Mr. Baldwin, that I shall see that the amendment is brought about at the appropriate time. Mr. BALDWIN. Thank you very much, Mr. King. The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions or comments? Again we thank you, Mr. Baldwin, for coming to the committee. Mr. BALDWIN. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Our next witness today is the Honorable James Roosevelt of the State of California. We are glad to have you with us today. Will you please come forward and be recognized. STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES ROOSEVELT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is with pleasure that I appear in support of the President's proposal to extend and improve the public assistance and child welfare services program of the Social Security Act and Chairman Mills' bill, H.R. 10032. Public welfare programs are designed to aid families or individuals handicapped not only by poverty, but by one or more of a variety of health or social handicaps-illness and disability, a deficiency in edu |