In the beginning of this century, there was a Russo-Japanese war. Japan had much higher literacy than Russia, Russia had much more in the way of national resources and Russia had many more people.

Nevertheless, it was Japan that won the Russo-Japanese War. The same was true in what happened in the Sino-Japanese War. In 1914, Germany had the highest literacy in Europe, and except for the fact that we entered the war in 1917, thereby increasing the preponderance against Germany, it is not unlikely that Germany would have won that war.

In the Second World War, Germany again had the highest educational standards, and had it not been for the fact that President Roosevelt set up, under J. Robert Oppenheimer, the Manhattan project and that we achieved the atom bomb when we did, the whole result might have been different. The reason that we achieved the atom bomb before Germany did is undoubtedly because Germany, through her Nazi persecutions, had lost the services of Albert Einstein and other great scientists, and it was those scientists who worked with Oppenheimer in order to achieve the atom bomb. Just think of what a calamity it would have been if Germany had reached the atom bomb 6 months before we did.

You have heard much testimony already on the deficiencies in our educational system and its needs.

DEFICIENCIES IN AMERICAN EDUCATION

Our own Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare has stated that a million American children attend overcrowded classrooms, that 2 million children go to schools in outmoded and unhealthly buildings, that 83,000 teachers do not meet the States requirements, that there are going to be 7,500,000 dropouts in the next decade. Our Secretary of Labor has pointed out that the dropouts today become the unemployed of today and the criminals and dependents on public welfare of tomorrow.

This, of course, is especially emphasized because of automation and the fact that unskilled jobs become more and more scarce, and even high school graduates, unless properly trained, are not employable.

To return to our Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, he has pointed out that 22 million adult Americans have less than eighthgrade schooling, that 5 million handicapped children do not have the education needs that they should have. He also has testified and has stated that from 25 to 40 percent of able high school graduates never get to college, that a 75-percent increase in the Nation's total expenditure for education is needed to catch up with these shortages and that really is only a beginning.

That would mean that we would raise the total current expenditure from $30 billion to over $50 billion, and that means today, not in 5 years from now, when conditions will be even worse, as over a million children a year join the schools and the cost of education. constantly increases.

The same testimony has come from the U.S. Secretary of Labor.

Mr. Chairman, some weeks ago, I wrote in the public press that if the United States wishes to acquire prestige and moral leadership in the world, we should abandon the proposed expenditure of $20 billion

in the attempt to get to the moon by 1970 and we should proudly announce that the $20 billion should be spent for such humanitarian purposes on this earth as, for instance, education.

I shall not go into the full statement of that letter, except to say that there are many people, both educators and members of Congress in the Senate, who are interested in education who do agree with me wholeheartedly.

On the other hand, very many persons, including the President of the United States in a recent press conference, stated that we could do both and that this Nation was rich enough to do both; in fact, we are rich enough to do both. In this situation, Senator Keating agreed with the President, although he does not always agree with the President.

I think that the reason we will not do both and that we are not going to do both is largely because of the shibboleth of the balanced budget. ADA believes that it would not be too much for the Federal Government to spend $4 billion a year under title IV of the act. Title IV now suggests a mere matter of a billion, five hundred million dollars over a 4-year period, or less than $400 million a year.

In 1961, the Senate approved Federal aid to education and authorized an expenditure of $2.5 billion over a 3-year period, or over $800 million a year. Since that time, educational needs have increased rather than decreased.

SHIBBOLETH OF FEDERAL CONTROL

Another shibboleth that is raised against Federal aid is Federal control.

The National Education Improvement Act of 1963 specifically prohibits Federal control. I shall not go into the paragraphs of that statement but the ADA would not be for Federal aid if they felt that it would involve Federal control, which it does not.

I think the whole history of Federal aid to education since 1862, when the first land-grant act was enacted, shows that Federal controĺ is just a bugaboo for people who either do not believe in Federal aid or do not believe in education.

To return to the question of a choice between the trip to the moon and the money to be spent for education, I of course agree that we need not make a choice, that we can do both. But so long as it is necessary for us to spend fabulous sums for defense, we cannot do both and have a balance budget.

I want to say a few words about a balanced budget. The dividends in human resources which would result from

Senator YARBOROUGH. Pardon me for interrupting. I have a very urgent appointment at 12 o'clock and I think I am compelled to be there by 12:15. It is now 12:07.

I have read your statement and it is a very excellent statement. I hesitate to ask you to condense it, since every word in here means so much, but I wonder if you could condense it, since I have read it.

I do want to ask one question, though. You say: "Since 1964, the gross national product has increased almost 30 percent." Now, has not the gross national product since 1936 increased almostMr. KARELSEN. 1946.

Senator YARBOROUGH. I mean since 1946. Has it not increased almost twofold?

Was it not

Mr. KARELSEN. You are quite right.

Senator YARBOROUGH. It is expected to be about $580 billion by 1965.

Mr. KARELSEN. You are quite right.

Senator YARBOROUGH. So that increase is almost 200 percent since 1946.

Mr. KARELSEN. I will just continue on this question.

As you notice, I say that the question of the balanced budget, we have a national debt today of $300 billion, although Senator Taft in 1938 felt that if we went over $5 billion, we would be in dire straits.

Now, I continue, I point out that the idea of the balanced budget in business is not so. A.T. & T. today owes $8 billion in bond issues. because it believes that the installation of added equipment will bring greater dividends. It is ridiculous to think that the U.S. Government cannot increase its indebtedness by $20 billion over a 5-year period to get the additional benefits of education and that the money that would be spent would put people back to work and would greatly decrease our expenditure for the unfortunate people who are not properly educated.

If I have made out a case for education, I am just going to ask the question to be asked, Why Federal aid? Why not let the States and local governments supply all of these vast funds?

STATE AND LOCAL FINANCES OVERBURDENED

The answer is simple: The States and local governments are already overburdened. Of the taxes today, 75 percent are collected by the Federal Government, which reminds me of the story about Willie Sutton, the bank robber. He was asked why he robbed banks and he said "Because that is where the money is."

Now, that is the situation, the money today is with the Federal Government.

Recently, all the bond issues, including a bond issue of $500 million in New York State, have been defeated, and recently a large number of budgets have been defeated, the reason being that the people believe that if the Congress sweeps the question of education under the rug, it must not be important.

As a result, there is an outrageous neglect in the financial need of education, not only in the poorer communities and sections of the country, but even in New York City, the richest and most influential city in the world. But New York City has an excellent board of education, under the presidency of Max J. Rubin, who was my partner for some 20 years, and Calvin Gross, who is a fine superintendent of schools. Many good things are accomplished in New York City's school system. But because of lack of funds, there is a tremendous deficiency.

Two recent surveys, one by the New York State Education Department, and one by Mark Schinnerer, for the board of education, clearly show that in order to reduce the number of overcrowded classes and other deficiencies, it would require $200 million should be added to

the budget. In other words, the present budget is approximately $500 million and it should be $200 million in addition. But the legislature of the richest State completely disregarded this as do the local groups. The fact that Congress each year does not appropriate moneys for education is not inspiring to the taxpayer to increase his local tax burden or to the State to increase its taxes for education of citizens. Leadership should come from Congress and from the Federal Government in this important field of national preservation.

It is certain that if this Nation continues to neglect educational needs, within 10 years, we will be a second-rate nation.

The need for financial support of education is our most important domestic problem today, and it is vital to the maintenance and improvement of our position in the world of tomorrow. The gentlemen in Congress have the burden of putting in effect the real needs for

education.

(The prepared statement of Frank E. Karelsen follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANK E. KARELSEN, AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Frank Karelsen, and, on behalf of the members and officers of Americans for Democratic Action, I very much appreciate the subcommittee allowing ADA time to give some views in support of Federal aid to elementary and secondary education.

For more than 30 years I have been a vice president of the Public Education Association of New York and the Child Study Association of America and am also chairman of the Executive Committee of the Public Education Association. I was also an organizer, director, and counsel for META (Metropolitan Educational Television Association). In 1955 I was a New York representative to the White House Conference on Education. I was for some years chairman of the Advisory Committee on Human Relations of the Board of Education of the city of New York. I am now one of the commissioners of the Community Mental Health Board of the city of New York. I am a Governor of the Fieldston Ethical Culture School of New York City, and honorary president of the All-Day Neighborhood Schools of the city of New York, and have served on numerous educational committees of various organizations. I have been a member of the National Board of Americans for Democratic Action for many years and have recently served as chairman of the Commission on Education of Americans for Democratic Action. We appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee.

Mr. Chairman, my testimony is to be confined to that portion of the act which affects primary and secondary schools only.

You will note that among my qualifications is the fact that I was a member of the White House Conference on Education of 1955. That Conference came out almost unanimously in favor of Federal aid first to construction, and a great majority toward teachers and general school support of primary and secondary educational institutions. I came to the conclusion after that Conference that in the Eisenhower administration there were two types of people--those who did not believe in Federal aid to education and those who did not believe in education. Sometimes it was very hard to distinguish between the two and I am afraid today that in this country there are too many people in these two classes. There is all too little understanding by the citizens of this country of the depth of the need for improved education. The lawmakers therefore have the burden of showing the leadership which would be necessary to bring this home to our voters. Mr. Chairman, I would like first to outline under various beadings what education can do for countries both in times of peace and war. I know that none of this will be new to you, Mr. Chairman, and to some of your colleagues, but I would like the record to show some of the astonishing things that have happened because of education. In times of peace we have before us the fact that Denmark over the last century and even today spends tore per capita than any nation in the world on schools. Denmark is a country with few, if any, natural resources but it is prosperous and the standard of living for all its people is the highest in the world, while countries with fabulous re

sources, like Mexico or Argentina or Brazil, who spend very little on education, have a very, very low standard. In other words, in times of peace, education is the most important national resource.

won.

Now, let us examine what education means to the defense of our Nation if war is forced upon us. In the beginning of this century there was a Russo-Japanese war. Japan at that time had far greater literacy than did Russia and Japan The same thing happened with the Sino-Japanese war. In 1914 Germany had the highest literacy in Europe, and except for the fact that in 1917 we went into the war, thereby increasing the preponderance of numbers against Germany to a tremendous extent, it is not unlikely that Germany would have won that war. In the Second World War Germany again had the highest educational standards, and had it not been for the fact that President Roosevelt set up, under J. Robert Oppenheimer, the Manhattan Project, Germany might well have won that war. Had Germany achieved the atom bomb 6 months before we did, the results would have been quite different. The reason that she did not have this success was because, fortunately for us, through her Nazi persecutions she had lost the services of Albert Einstein and other great scientists. Thus, in fact, it was highly skilled scientist, both American and foreign, who worked in the Manhattan project that enabled us to beat Germany and Japan to the successful com pletion of the atom bomb.

You have had before your committee much testimony on the deficiencies in our educational system and in its needs. Our own Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare has stated that a million American children attend overcrowded classrooms that 2 million children go to schools in outmoded and unhealthy and hazardous buildings; that 83,000 teachers do not meet the State requirements; that 7,500,000 dropouts are anticipated for the decade of the sixties, and, parenthetically, our Secretary of Labor has pointed out that dropouts today become the unemployed of today and the criminals and dependents on public welfare of tomorrow. This, of course, is especially emphasized because of automation and the fact that unskilled jobs become more and more scare, and even high school students unless properly trained are not employable.

To return to our Secretary of Welfare, he has pointed out that 22 million adult Americans have less than eighth grade schooling; that 5 million handicapped children's educational needs are not being met: that from 25 to 40 percent of able high school graduates never get to college; that a 75-percent increase in the Nation's total expenditure for education is needed to catch up with these shortages. This would mean raising total current expenditures from $30 to $50 billion. The same and similar testimony comes from our U.S. Commissioner of Education and our very able Secretary of Labor.

Mr. Chairman, some weeks ago I wrote in the public press that if the United States wishes to acquire prestige and moral leadership in the world we should abandon the proposed expenditure of $20 billion (and it probably will cost billions more) to put a man on the moon by 1970; that we should proudly announce that the $20 billion will be devoted to humanitarian purposes on this planet. There is a crying need on this earth for expenditures of large sums of money for education, housing, medical research, increased foreign aid, etc.; that the nations of the world, especially the new nations, are looking to us for leadership in these fields.

"It is true that the space research with a man's trip to the moon has certain fringe benefits for the earth's people, and that the many billions that will be spent for Telstar satellites, rockets and celestial observation will more than take care of the development of those fringe benefits; that we should therefore forthrightly state that under our democratic system of government we think it more important to devote these vast sums of money to the necessities of the people on our planet than to be first on the moon: that a nation which has less concern for the welfare of the earth's people should win this pyrrhic victory." This letter was made part of the Congressional Record, and I have received many letters from Members of Congress and persons interested in education in which they agree with me wholeheartedly. On the other hand, very many persons. including the President of the United States in a recent press conference, stated that we could do both, and that this Nation was rich enough to do both and, in fact, we are. Numerous lawmakers take this same position. The point, however, is that we will not do both. And why will we not do both? We will not do both largely because of the shibboleth of the balanced budget. ADA believes that it would not be too much for Federal aid to spend $4 billion a year under title IV of the act; title IV now suggests a mere matter of a billion five hundred