Hon. WILBUR MILLS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., February 23, 1962. Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, MY DEAR WILBUR: I am enclosing herewith a letter from one of our prominent physicians in Mobile, Ala., Dr. James W. Coker, Jr. You will note his interest as a pediatrician in the hearings being conducted by your committee pertaining to Federal grants to help finance day care centers for children. I shall appreciate your including this letter in the record of these hearings. With warm, personal regards, I am, Sincerely yours, FRANK W. BOYKIN, MOBILE, ALA., February 14, 1962. DEAR SIR: The hearing now being conducted by the House Ways and Means Committee pertaining to Federal grants to help finance day care centers for children is of special interest to me as a pediatrician. The children that are being pushed into day care centers so that the mother can go to work will be the real problem of the next generation. Basic love and security will not be learned by the young child in the day care center but with the mother at home. Maybe those mothers on relief rolls need some assistance through a day care center but the majority of working mothers of pre-school-age children should be in the home. Passage of this measure would indeed be a blow against family life. My position against passage of this bill is based on observations of children of all economic levels. I would appreciate your expressing this view to the House Ways and Means Committee. Sincerely, Mr. LEO H. IRWIN, JAMES W. COKER, Jr., M.D. BRONXDALE NURSERY & KINDERGARTEN, Chief Counsel, House Ways and Means Committee, DEAR MR. ERWIN: In our day care center we are licensed to care for 60 preschool-age children. These children cannot be adequately cared for in their homes because the mother must work or is ill. The families of these children cannot afford private day-care facilities because of their economic situations. In our own community we are never able to accept all the children needing our services. We always have a long waiting list. At present we have 44 children waiting who qualify for acceptance. Multiply this with the same situations which exist in communities all over our country and you can readily see we have a serious child-care problem on a national scale. We are grateful to Congressman Wilbur D. Mills for his bill, Public Welfare Amendments of 1962, and to our Federal Government officials with foresight and understanding who are working to solve this problem. Therefore, we urge immediate action and acceptance of H.R. 10032, sections 527 and 528, so that Federal fund can be made available for a realistic child-care program. We should not have to deny so many children a place where they can spend their early childhood days in a healthy and wholesome growing atmosphere. Respectfully yours, (Mrs.) ELLA LOHMAN, President. Mr. LEO H. IRWIN, Chief Counsel, THE CHILDREN'S GUILD, INC., New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. IRWIN: The board of trustees of the Children's Guild of Baltimore wishes to go on record endorsing the principle of Federal aid for day-care services for children. We urge the passage of H.R. 10032, Public Welfare Amendments of 1962, endorsed by Congressman Wilbur D. Mills on February 1, 1962. There is no more urgent need in the country than day-care assistance for mil lions of children needing this service. Very truly yours, Attached list of endorsements: HAROLD MANEKIN, President. Signatures of members of board of trustees obtained to be sent to Senator Butler. (Numerous signatures follow.) NEW YORK, N.Y., February 13, 1962. Chairman WILBUR D. MILLS, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.: Citizens Committee for Children of New York wishes to have inserted in the record its support of H.R. 10032. We are particularly delighted about the stress of services to children in their own homes because we believe this to be the best attack on dependency. MARION R. ASCOLI, Congressman WILBUR D. MILLS, NASHVILLE, TENN., February 14, 1962. Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, Fifty representatives of thirteen agencies and organizations offering day-care services at Institute on Day Care urge your committee to act favorably on House bill 10032, i.e., extension of public welfare services. New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. IRWIN: We urgently request the Federal appropriations for the day-care services for children contained in H.R. 10032, Public Welfare Amendments of 1962, now in the House Ways and Means Committee. Our knowledge of the children in our various communities leads us to believe that millions of children are in need of this service and are suffering for lack of them. Federal appropriation will encourage the States to meet the need with greater reality. Sincerely yours, MARGARET THRIFT. H STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, Re H.R. bill No. 10032, the Public Welfare Amendments of 1962. Mr. LEO H. IRWIN, Chief Counsel, New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. IRWIN: On behalf of the Ohio Department of Public Welfare I wish to present the following comments and statements with respect to the above legislation. We are in basic agreement with the proposals set forth by Secretary Ribicoff, and wholeheartedly agree with the philosophy underlying them. We know that in full context it represents a major step forward in the administration of public welfare. Ohio has, for some time, attempted to move assistance programs toward a rehabilitative objective. Certain parts of this bill, however, do not appear to strengthen rehabilitative goals. With reference to "Federal Financial Participation in Costs of Services,” sections 101, 403, 1003, and 1403, which refer to the Federal Government increasing its participation in administrative costs up to 75 percent, we strongly endorse this amendment, and hope that paperwork that appears to be a concomitant to such an amendment, can be kept to the absolute minimum. Secretary Ribicoff has averred to the necessity for decreasing paperwork for staff members in order that they might devote more time to providing services for people. We feel that section 135 of this bill, "Federal Payments for Foster Care in Child-Care Institutions," defeats many of the purposes and standards advocated by the Children's Bureau and other child-care agencies in that we do not feel it is in the best interest of children to have large populations built up in child-care institutions which do not provide a homelike atmosphere for children. We, therefore, recommend that this section, insofar as it relates to child-care institutions, be deleted. Section 106 pertains to "Incentives for Employment Through Consideration of Expenses in Earning Income." As we understand this part of the bill, it would broaden our present policies and allow that expenses attributable to earned income be exempt in making up the assistance budget. We favor this because it would have a tendency to give people an incentive to work, as well as allowing them sufficient resources to do something toward rehabilitating themselves as family units. Section 107, "Protective Payments Under Dependent Children Program": Ohio strongly feels that this should not be included in the law, but should be handled administratively. The way it is set forth it would not provide the type of protection that is envisioned, particularly in States that have county administered programs such as we have in Ohio. This amendment is based on States meeting 100 percent of standards, and 100 percent of standards does not mean the same in every State when based on the amounts of grants received by recipients. If protective payments have to be related to meeting 100 percent of standards, the State would then only be allowed to apply protective payments to one-half of 1 percent of the number of other recipients of families of aid to dependent children. It would become a relatively impossible administrative procedure in a State such as Ohio, and would not meet the problem that this particular section of the law is intended to meet. Although we favor protective payments on a limited basis, we cannot favor this section of the law as written. "Part B: Improvements in Administration through Training, Demonstrations, and Public Advisory Groups": The State of Ohio endorses this part of the bill as we recognize the need for increased personnel and more adequately trained personnel. We feel that the Federal Government will need to take the leadership in supplying grants to the States if we are to be able to promptly move forward with an improved service and rehabilitative program. Sincerely, MARY GORMAN, Director. WELFARE COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO, HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. GENTLEMEN: You have before you H.R. 10032. I would like to comment on sections 527 and 528 which pertain to the care and protection of young children of employed mothers. Your committee has available to it much data from governmental sources with reference to the increased employment of women and the inadequacy of community resources for the day care of their children. I have no desire to repeat this information, but only to relate it to the Chicago area. In 1958 a little less than one-third of the labor force was women; the rate of employment among Negro women was four times that of white women. The 1960 census data has not yet been analyzed but we believe it will reveal that the number of employed women has, if anything, increased in the past 4 years. We know that the number of low-fee day nurseries has decreased markedly. In fact, during the last decade the number of day nurseries under welfare auspices in Chicago has dropped from 23 to 12. Most of those which closed were located in seriously disadvantaged areas of the city where there is a heavy concentration of Negro families. Almost without exception, the reason for closing was lack of funds. The families needing and using the nurseries were unable to meet the cost of care. The welfare agencies sponsoring the service could not raise from voluntary sources enough additional funds to meet the deficits. The lack of day-care services, especially in enighborhoods composed of low-income families, has been identified as one of the most critical unmet welfare needs in the city. Along with other communities, we have been concerned with the mounting cost of public assistance. In 1960 the Cook County Board of Commissioners authorized an independent study of the ADC program. One of the study findings related to the fact that a substantial number of ADC mothers were able and willing to work but the lack of low-fee day care centers made it impossible for them to seek employment. A State legislative commission on public aid made the same comment in 1959 and urged the establishment of public day care programs, For 3 years the welfare council has been trying to develop a plan that would meet this problem. It was evident that the need was too great and the costs too high to be met by voluntary funds alone. Any workable plan would have to involve a partnership of public and voluntary agencies. Last summer, at the request of the welfare council, a bill was introduced and overwhelmingly passed by the Illinois General Assembly to implement this idea on an experimental basis. Funds were appropriated to permit three pilot day care centers to be established in selected neighborhoods, using a combination of public and voluntary financing. The program is just now getting underway, but we believe it will demonstrate on a small scale one means of solving this difficult problem. One of its potentials lies in the fact that we will be utilizing the strengths and interests of both public and voluntary services, a principle which we believe to be important. It seems to us Federal participation in developing resources for the young chil dren of working mothers is both logical and necessary. We believe sections 527 and 528 of H.R. 10032 are intended to do this. Furthermore we believe other metropolitan areas will warmly support this proposal, for the problem is not confined to Chicago. We urge that you give the matter your thoughtful and favorable consideration. Very truly yours, IRWIN J. ASKOW, Chairman, Executive Committee, Division on Family and Child Welfare. Mr. LEO H. IRWIN, STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE, Chief Counsel, Room 1102, New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. IRWIN The observations I have made over the past 82 years as day care consultant with lith licensing responsibility lead me to believe that Federal aid for day care services is necessary now. Many parents who are using day care are not paying the fees necessary to maintain safe day care facilities. Community chest funds have been decreasing rather than increasing their support of day care centers. Additional facilities need to be developed immediately in order to prevent further neglect and abuse of children. Mrs. Oettinger has recently held a conference on the growing problem of abuse of children. Parents of these children will not pay the cost of adequate day care. While efforts are made to encourage the parents to value their children's mental and physical health, the parents and children need to be relieved of each other through use of day care services planned to strengthen family life. Many children can remain in their own homes if most of their waking hours are spent with day care teachers who love and cherish them. Parents who have lost their own self-respect may learn to value their children by seeing them cherished by others. In this way they may become more adequate parents, and, most important, the early formative years will offer more experiences tending to maximize the child's satisfaction from his own achievements. Well planned and financed day care programs develop in children the courage to overcome the limitations that beset them and their parents-such as being supported by ADC. New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. IRWIN: As director of Eliot-Pearson School, and in behalf of the school, I am endorsing the principles of Federal aid for day care services as set forth in the bill entitled "Public Welfare Amendments of 1962," No. H.R. 10032. This school has been very much interested in legislation with regard to day care for children, and feels that the passage of such a bill would be an important step forward. Sincerely yours, Mr. LEO H. IRWIN, Chief Counsel, EVELYN W. GOODENOUGH. YALE UNIVERSITY CHILD STUDY CENTER, New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. IRWIN: I am writing in support of bill H.R. 10032, Public Welfare Amendments of 1962 with particular concern for that part which refers to day care programs. As an educator I am concerned with the need for conservation of human resources. I am convinced from years of experience with children under and over regular school age that school learning problems regularly appear among children whose needs have been neglected in the very early years. It is |