ability of unemployed parents of such children (with proper safeguards including provisions for their care) is another example. While in general we favor the principles of cash payment in assistance we recognize the value of a carefully safeguarded provision for protective payments in unusual cases. The addition of day care provisions under child welfare should likewise serve to help the children of all low-income working mothers including those who might otherwise have to depend upon public aid. The provision for special demonstration projects also opens up a wide variety of possibilities for States to experiment with new and more flexible methods of meeting particular needs. And, of course, the inclusion of the second parent in the Federal sharing in assistance payments is an important step toward more adequate benefits.

The third area of specific recommendation in the assembly position statement reads as follows:

"Means to these ends.-To achieve these ends four kinds of change are paramount. First, there is need for better financing from all levels of government, given under conditions which assure an adequate level of help to people wherever they may live. Second, there is a compelling need for more professional social work and related personnel and the resources of all levels of government should be committed to an intensive investment in the training and employment of such personnel for public welfare functions. Third, there is a need for streamlining public welfare agency structure, policies, and administrative procedures to better serve these ends. Fourth, there is need for a better interpretation of the job of public welfare so that policymakers and the public may be fully informed regarding its functions and its problems."

Here again there are many provisions throughout H.R. 10032 that would contribute to these ends. But none is more important than those which will encourage a more adequate investment of funds in qualified social work personnel in public welfare agencies, both through a higher rate of reimbursement for such services and the inclusion of special provisions of training for public welfare personnel. The recognition of qualified staff service as essential to all other improvements in public welfare puts these provisions in the highest priority of needed change.

In conclusion I would like to congratulate the chairman for his sponsorship of this important measure and the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and his colleagues for the thoughtful and thorough manner in which they have developed these proposals. There has been the widest possible consultation in this process and I believe you can depend on an equally broad basis of support from the whole field of social welfare, both voluntary and governmental, in their implementation should these proposals be incorporated in the law.

NATIONAL SOCIAL WELFARE ASSEMBLY,

POSITION STATEMENT ON PUBLIC WELFARE

New York, N.Y.

This statement of support for public welfare has been adopted by the National Social Welfare Assembly in the belief that no social welfare agency, whatever its immediate responsibility, can do its own job well unless it does so within the framework of a sound governmental welfare policy. While public welfare programs to carry out this policy must adapt to changing needs and circumstances, the convictions and principles supporting them are basic and enduring. Essential to all social welfare programs, both public and voluntary, is the belief that in a democracy the social good and individual welfare depend upon each other. Today public welfare policy is under reexamination by those who would like to see it better adapted to current needs and under challenge by those who are unreconciled to its role in modern society. This statement is intended as one contribution to the discussion and understanding of an important current issue.

I. SOCIAL WELFARE: PUBLIC AND VOLUNTARY

Social welfare plays an indispensable role in the functioning of modern democratic society. In one sense this is a mass society depending for its prosperity on big organization, specialized jobs, and complex relationships that inevitably tend toward impersonality. But this is also a society which places a high value on the individual: his opportunities, security, and well-being. Social

welfare helps to reconcile these two values; it is one of the devices used by society to restore the balance in favor of the individual. Its job is to help compensate for the impersonality of mass institutions by easing the hardships inevitably created for particular individuals and groups in the population. Social welfare programs assist pepole, either as individuals or as a group with a common problem, through periods of economic stress and social crisis in their lives. In doing this they supplement and underpin the family and other forms of personal association that help meet the needs of individuals. Their social purpose is twofold: to assist and strengthen the individual and, in so doing, help society work smoothly in the best interests of all its members.

The purposes of democracy are best served when social welfare programs function under both voluntary and governmental auspices. Programs supported by voluntary contribution and effort have the freedom to emphasize variety, flexibility, and experimentation; they can develop limited programs for particular needs or particular groups, new approaches to needs, and varied approaches to needs of long standing. But this freedom depends, in turn, upon the existence of a governmental program adequate in coverage and resources to meet those welfare needs that lie beyond the capacity of voluntary effort. Only government can meet widespread social welfare needs which require programs based on a rule of law, tax-based financing, or principles of universal availability. There are, in addition, particular circumstances in which a social service can be better or more acceptably provided by government than by a voluntary welfare agency or where the public interest will be best served by providing the individual or community with a choice of auspices. The relationship is complementary rather than competitive. The one is necessary to the other.

II. THE PUBLIC WELFARE PROGRAM

"Public welfare" is the name commonly applied to those social welfare programs which function with tax support under governmental auspices and are directed toward the specific economic and social needs of particular individuals and families. Public welfare departments are the principal agents of government in carrying out this task. State and localities have major responsibility for the actual discharge of most public welfare responsibilities but the Federal Government assists them with some of these through grants-in-aid.

Public welfare is the channel through which the responsible level of governments assures to individuals and families the means of meeting those social and economic needs it recognizes as basic, but for which other provisions have proved inadequate. Among the present program provisions of public welfare, often spotty in their availability and limited in their adequacy, are the following: economic assistance in those circumstances when individual and other resources are either lacking or insufficient to meet minimum needs; social services to help and protect children or adults in a particularly vulnerable situation; counseling and other social work services which help individuals and families regain selfsupport or function more effectively; financial aid and social service to help individuals secure medical and related health services not otherwise available to them; special services for the aged; operation of institutions for those whose welfare needs can best be met in this way; the provision of services for young people or stimulation of other community efforts in their behalf; the setting of standards for voluntary or commercial agencies operating in the welfare field; and other governmental functions requiring social work knowledge.

III. MEASURES THAT PREVENT WELFARE NEEDS

Public welfare helps support a healthy society by assisting individuals in times of hardship, readjustment, and social difficulty. But there are limits to what it can do. It cannot take the place of an economy which provides the means of livelihood to all. It cannot substitute for the broad social measures that reduce or prevent need. Too often public welfare is blamed for the very social ills it seeks to mitigate for individuals. It cannot do its own job effectively if it is regarded as a panacea for all social problems or a convenient scapegoat for their existence. An effective public welfare policy must, therefore, be built upon a foundation of broad economic and social measures that contribute to general prosperity and minimize economic hardship and social handicap for individuals. Basic to this objective is the existence of a healthy adaptive economy with production sufficient to assure jobs to all persons in the labor market and a reason80118-62-23

able standard of living to those who-because of age, disability, family responsibilities or temporary economic dislocations-are not able to work.

The cost and volume of public welfare services can best be minimized by the development of conditions and measures that prevent the needs that bring people to public welfare agencies. In this way the public welfare agencies can be freed to perform their own essential function of individualized aid and service to meet particular needs. To this end we support (1) contributory social insurance programs to meet predictable needs on an adequate level; (2) provision for the training, placement, relocation, and assisted migration (if needed) of occupationally displaced or handicapped workers as well as for young people and others entering the labor market; (3) provision of employment at prevailing wage rates through public works programs for persons, including young people, for whom other jobs are not available; (4) publicly financed preventive and remedial health services for the protection, treatment, and rehabilitation of persons of all ages affected or threatened by physical or emotional illness; (5) provisions to support fair labor standards; (6) provisions to assure equal treatment and op portunity to all groups in the population; (7) provisions to assure decent housing and community conditions; and (8) provisions for research, including social research, and demonstration programs related to the causes of economic need and social maladjustment.

IV. NEEDED CHANGES IN PUBLIC WELFARE

We know from our firsthand experience and observation that many individuals and groups do not today receive from public welfare agencies the help that they desperately need. There is a vast gulf between present reality and our goal: a public welfare program which first provides a floor of economic and social protection on the basis of actual need to all individuals and families who fall below an acceptable minimum standard and, second, does so in a way which supports their self-respect and helps, wherever possible, to remove the cause of their distress. We, therefore, urge the States to examine their laws, resources, and policies with a view to making their public welfare programs more adequately serve the needs of all of those within their boundaries and to do so in terms of statewide standards that assure minimum protection in all their subdivisions. But because ours is one Nation, based on one economy and serving one people, we also look to the Federal Government to use its leadership and broader based financial resources to help the States develop policies and programs that assure adequate protection to all Americans wherever they may live. We, therefore, urge the Congress and the several State legislatures to examine and revise their welfare laws and supporting appropriations with the following goals in mind.

1. Eligibility.-It is to the general public interest that public welfare benefits and services should be promptly available to all those who need them. Eligibility should be based on actual and individually determined need for such aid and/or services without arbitrary restrictions related to residence, categorical definitions, social status or formulas for the sharing of costs among the several levels of government. Social services should not be restricted to persons in economic need. This is especially important when prompt help will serve to prevent or minimize such long-term problems as family breakdown, chronic dependency or invalidism. Child welfare services should move toward a plan of Federal-State cooperation which emphasizes statewide applicability and a broadened definition of their scope to include preventive, protective, and supportive services to all children who need them.

2. Program.-Individualized aid and service is the essence of the public welfare program. It is, therefore, essential that the financial and other program resources of the public welfare agency be sufficient in amount and variety to meet actual needs in the most constructive way. For many people whose need is unusual and continuing (for example, the very old who need nursing home care) the principal need is for more adequate financial assistance in order to provide a life of dignity and a better standard of care. For others there is need for a more intensive investment in social service in order to help them find the means to self-support or a more satisfactory way of life. For others the primary need is for a wider variety of direct services such as physical rehabilitation; vocational retraining, experience, and relocation; day care and other child-caring services; homemaker service; protected living arrangements; specialized institutional care, etc. Fitting the service to the need will in the long run prove the best economy in public welfare expenditure and the best investment in better individual and family functioning.

3. Means to these ends.-To acheive these ends four kinds of change are paramount. First, there is need for better financing from all levels of government, given under conditions which assure an adequate level of help to people wherever they may live. Second, there is a compelling need for more professional social work and related personnel and the resources of all levels of government should be committed to an intensive investment in the training and employment of such personnel for public welfare functions. Third, there is a need for streamlining public welfare agency structure, policies, and administrative procedures to better serve these ends. Fourth, there is need for a better interpretation of the job of public welfare so that policymakers and the public may be fully informed regarding its functions and its problems.

On December 13, 1961, the assembly annual meeting adopted the above position statement and, on motion from the floor, added the following statement with respect to the public assistance responsibility of public welfare agencies:

"In adopting this position statement on public welfare, we, the members of the National Social Welfare Assembly in annual meeting on December 13, 1961, wish to reaffirm our belief in public welfare as a vital responsibility of a democracy which recognizes the dignity and rights of human beings.

These Where

"We wish also to express our confidence in the integrity of the vast majority of those who have been obliged to turn to public assistance in time of need. are people like the rest of us who would prefer to remain self-supporting. dishonesty occurs, it represents the same small percentage as may be found in other walks of American life. We do not condone cheating or low moral standards, whether it takes the form of income tax evasion or the hiding of resources by a public assistance applicant. But neither do we think it just to condemn an entire group or program because of the misdeeds of a small minoritya small minority whose infractions can be dealt with by the regular processes of law.

"The purpose of public assistance is to provide a living for those without other means of support. Obviously, in a money economy individuals must have money to survive. Public assistance rolls are made up primarily of those who are in need because they are unable to work: the old, the young, the disabled, and those for whom no employment is available. These are factors for which the individual cannot be held responsible.

"No society will deny help to those in need, particularly to needy children. For their best development children should be cared for in their own homes whenever possible, rather than in institutions or foster homes, for children's right to parental care and affection must be preserved. Too, care at home costs less in dollars.

"We reaffirm our belief that for long term gains, prevention and rehabilitation are essential parts of public welfare services, for public welfare must be an instrument for restoring and maintaining people in lives of usefulness. To do the job well, there is no substitute for well-qualified staff and adequate financing."

Mr. BONDY. Mr. Chairman, may I request, in addition to what I have filed, that there be put in the record the brief statement of the National Council of Jewish Women, which I hold?

The CHAIRMAN. At the conclusion of your remarks and responses to questions it may be added: that is, Mrs. Charles Hymes' statement. Without objection that will be included in the record at that point.

Mr. Bondy, as one far more informed in this field than I am, can it be said that the enactment of this proposal, H.R. 10032, will provide the opportunity for better administration of our welfare programs and in that respect tend to move in the direction of minimizing or eliminating abuses that are alleged to exist within the operation of the program?

Secondly, will it offer more than a mere possibility, but a probability, that in the years ahead there may be reductions in the cost of operating these welfare programs from the point of view of Federal and State governments?

Mr. BONDY. Mr. Chairman, on your first point, as you know, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare has taken steps now within authority that he holds under law to tighten up certain ad

ministrative provisions that, it is hoped, would reduce and tend to eliminate abuses. We believe that within the provisions of this resolution there will be a strengthening of administrative lines and procedures by reason of having more adequate and more competent staffing, people who are in a better position to catch the person, and nobody can say it does not exist, who intends to take advantage of something for his own benefit when he does not have a right to it.

We believe that is a very important problem of today and we believe that the provisions of this bill, particularly in the strengthening of administrative and service staff, will tend very strongly to further elimination of those abuses.

On your second point, I can only say, Mr. Chairman, that the experience in a good many communities, some of which the Secretary cited to you the other day, where adequate staff has been put on on a controlled small experimental basis, so to speak, there has been the double results; first, of aiding many clients to go off the relief rolls and to find themselves in a self-supporting independent position; and, secondly, as a result of an end saving in the total public assistance expenditure.

If those experiences can be duplicated with more adequate staffing generally, it is our judgment that there is good reason to believe that there would be a significant reduction in costs.

The CHAIRMAN. In addition to the personnel that you mention, is it not your thought that making permanent the payments to those who may be in foster homes, the establishment of the protective payments, can also lead to some possible elimination of some alleged abuses within the welfare operation?

Mr. BONDY. I think that is true. That is certainly true where the person is, one might say, incompetent, not necessarily mentally incompetent in the proper use of the word, but certainly incompetent in the handling of funds.

I think that it is exceedingly important in viewing this provision, however, to pay great mind and make provision for safeguards; because there is a very wide and general acceptance, I think, now in our country of the principle of cash payments.

This exceptional procedure should be regarded as exceptional in our judgment and should have important safeguards thrown around it. The CHAIRMAN. What is your position with respect to the limitation referred to by the previous witness in the protective payment? Mr. BONDY. I would say at the outset, as the resolution suggests, there should be a more limited tryout of this lifting of the present cash payment provision in exceptional cases. I would think that it should not be thrown wide open, that there should be a limitation. It is a matter in which there could very well be some period of experience to see how well it operates and whether abuses enter in. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Mason.

Mr. MASON. I want to ask one question, sir. Is this mobility of labor that you talk about one of the reasons for the trend to a strong centralized government and the trend away from States rights and State control?