Dr. Zooк. That is right. The associate members do not vote, so I have not, of course, counted them anywhere. The institutional members consist of the colleges and universities, and of an increasing number of school systems, the public school system of Philadelphia, New York City, Pittsburgh, and so on.

Senator ELLENDER. Those are public and private?

Dr. Zooк. Public and private school systems. The proportion of institutional members which should be cataloged as privately controlled institutions, as against publicly controlled, is somewhat larger because of the number of colleges and universities being more largely privately controlled.

Senator ELLENDER. Is the council maintained by subscriptions? Dr. Zook. It is maintained almost entirely by dues from the members.

Senator ELLENDER. Thank you, Doctor.

Senator THOMAS. May I indulge in a bit of history and prophecy. I want to make this point, and before I make the point I will give a little bit of history. The soldier education bill, which was carried in the GI bill of rights, was a bill which was written in this committee. No hearings were held on it at all, but the GI bill of rights people accepted the whole bill. The bill was passed out unanimously by our committee, but in that bill as it went out was a change in the philosophy of education in our country, and that is what I think can be done here now. We did not pass that bill originally on the basis of taking care of the individual soldier boy. We passed it because America decided it could not risk the loss of leadership in a whole generation. That bill accepted the thesis that America needed education in order to survive.

As the bill went out-it was changed in conference somewhat, but before the Senate bill was passed I was asked how many students might respond and take advantage of this bill, and I said probably as many as 900,000, which seemed to me to be a great number and that I was probably too high. I was laughed out of court, but already something like 1,300,000 have responded, and the end is not yet. Now, I am sure that once we start Federal aid in this country there will be another recognition on the part of the whole Nation of the value of education, and that we will simply be surprised at the demands for enlargement of our high schools, our secondary schools, our colleges and our universities, as a result of this upping in the grade. And it is something, incidentally, that must be done if we are to maintain the standards that we have now, with the great dollar wealth that we carry throughout our country.

I cannot help but say, Mr. Chairman-you will have to forgive me -but I want Dr. Zook to say that he rather agrees with my prophecy that if once we start this we will be as much surprised over it as we were over the soldier education bill. In the wake of it will come the overcoming of those needs that we have. We need doctors, we need nurses, we need laboratory assistants, we need scientists, and once the scholarship notion is developed in our country, as it will be under the McCarran bill, America will make a great advance in meeting these needs.

Dr. Zook. Senator, you remind me of something. I happen to be the chairman of the President's Advisory Committee on Higher Education, which has had a number of meetings, and which is expected

to issue a report at some time in the rather early future. Now, the amount of higher education, especially at junior college level, which seems to be necessary in the early future, is something which surprises us all in the commission, and which I am sure we have got to take care of at some time in the early future. So I hope to have an opportunity not very long hence to appear before you with respect to the needs that arise, more particularly out of the field of higher education. Senator HILL. In that connection, Doctor, the more I have thought about the subject of Federal control and those who oppose Federal aid right away, of course, that has been the main argument, Federal control-the more it seems to me when we analyze it, that any real fear, any bona fide fear of Federal control stems out of really a lack of faith in our people, in the people themselves, because certainly the whole history of our country shows that in the final analysis the people determine what our policies are, what our programs are, and what our Government is. I wish you would think about that a little bit, and the next time you come down talk to us a little in terms of confidence in the people, and show that there need be no fear of Federal control.

Dr. Zook. I think that for practical purposes that means we ought to be able to trust the Federal Government as well as the State and local governments, and I assure you that I do.

Senator HILL. That is right. Because, after all, who is the Government? It is the people.

Senator SMITH. Senator Hill seems to be endorsing the Jeffersonian rather than the Hamiltonian doctrine now.

Senator HILL. Well, Dr. Zook told us about Newton D. Baker spending the night reading Thomas Jefferson.

Senator SMITH. I would like to call the attention of the Senator from Alabama to the fact that I recently put into the record a letter from the commissioner of the university in my State, describing Jefferson's papers, and a fragment of the Declaration of Independence that had just been discovered, which was a very interesting addition to Jeffersonia. I am very much in sympathy with Jefferson's position. Dr. Zook. I will leave the break-down of this ballot for you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator AIKEN. The material will be put in the record, and I know that the committee, from their actions, have evidenced very great interest in your testimony. You brought out some points which heretofore had not been placed before the committee, and we appreciate that fact very much.

Dr. Zook. Thank you, Senator.

(Dr. Zook submitted the following brief:)

STATEMENT OF GEORGE F. ZOOK, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN COUNCIL ON EDUCATION, APRIL 23, 1947

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am here as a representative of the American Council on Education. The American Council on Education is, as perhaps you know, our attempt in the field of education to federate the activities of the very numerous educational associations and institutions in their consideration of major problems in education. We carry on our work through extensive studies and conferences.

At the present time, the council consists of 65 constituent members, 56 associate members, and 840 institutional members, composed of higher educational institutions and school systems, both public and private.

Before describing for you the official actions undertaken under the auspices of the council, I wish to give you some personal impressions concerning certain of the major issues involved in the proposed legislation. The question of Federal aid to education has been studied intensively for the past 25 years. In fact, no other problem in American education has received anything like the amount of attention as has been given to the problem of Federal aid to education. It would take a good many pages to make a list of the numerous research studies which have been undertaken in this field. I shall mention, at this time, only several of the most important ones.

In 1931 President Hoover appointed the National Advisory Committee on Education, which, after a number of months of intensive study, under the leadership of Dr. Henry Suzalo, rendered its report in two volumes. The first of these two volumes is a landmark in the consideration of this problem.

In 1938, President Roosevelt appointed the President's Advisory Committee on Education, Dr. Floyd W. Reeves, Director. This committee was responsible for various staff reports and for an excellent policy report dealing specifically with the matter of Federal aid to education.

In 1942, the American Youth Commission, operating under the auspices of the American Council on Education, after publishing a number of volumes relating to the youth problem, issued a general policy statement entitled "Youth and the Future." All of the members of this commission were very prominent persons in the social and educational life of the United States, including, Mr. Owen D. Young, Mr. Henry I. Harriman, Mrs. Dorothy Canfield Fisher, Mr. Chester Rowell, and Mr. Newton D. Baker.

In 1945, the Educational Policies Commission, of the National Education Association, and the Problems and Policies Committee, of the American Council on Education, joined in issuing a policy statement entitled "Federal-State Relations in Education."

Finally, in 1945, Dr. John K. Norton, representing the American Council on Education and several other educational organizations, was responsible for the publication in mimeographed form of an exceedingly extensive investigation of this problem entitled “An Inventory of Public School Expenditures in the United States." This study was the basis of the shorter publication, Unfinished Business in American Education, copy of which I wish to place in your hands at this time. I have selected the names of these studies out of a great many dealing with the problem of Federal aid to education in order to make it very clear, as I stated in the beginning, that no other subject in American education has been the subject of so large an amount of study as the problem of Federal aid to education.

Every one of these exceedingly careful studies which have been undertaken by committees and commissions of leading civilians and professional educators reached two conclusions: (1) That education is of very great concern to the Nation as a whole as well as to the several States and localities; (2) that, in order to raise the level of education in a considerable number of the States to a desirable level, Federal aid to education is necessary.

It is perhaps unnecessary for me to emphasize the fact that education is a matter of great concern to the Nation as a whole, but I should like to point out that in the recent war this fact was brought home to us in a variety of ways. First of all there were large numbers of young men who could not be inducted into the armed forces because they were either deficient in their ability to read and write or because of various physical deficiencies, a large proportion of which could have been corrected had they been taken in time. In other words, our Government lacked many divisions of men, sorely needed in Europe and in the Orient, because of the lack of effective educational facilities.

On the other hand, wherever the schools and colleges were able to undertake effective training and education, the amount of time which the armed forces found it necessary to use in specialized training of one kind or another was correspondingly reduced.

Finally, as everyone knows, with increased transportation facilities the population of the country is becoming more and more mobile and hence it is a matter of great concern to the wealthier States, where, in general, educational facilities are fairly effective, as to the training and education of individuals who migrate to them from States where, for economic reasons, it is impossible to provide effective educational facilities.

I shall now mention briefly some of the facts brought out by the numerous research studies to which I have alluded which seem to me to justify the conclusion that Federal aid to education is necessary. In the first place, as everybody knows, the wealth and income of the several States vary greatly. Many people do not

realize, however, that the number of children per 1,000 adults to be supported in school also varies greatly from one State to another. For example, there are twice as many young people from 5 to 17 years of age to be supported in schools in South Carolina as in California.

The results of this situation are inevitable.

There is a considerably larger proportion of illiteracy in the poorer States than in others. The number of days during which schools are open varies from one State to another depending largely upon the ability of the States to keep them open. For example, the average days per year in Wisconsin is 166 and in Mississippi 131. Also, as a direct result of the uneven per capita wealth and average income in the several States, the median salaries of teachers in this country as revealed by these studies 3 years ago was about $1,600 per year. However, in New York it was possible to pay $2,600 per year, in Massachusetts, something over $2,500 per year but in Mississippi only $559 per year. These figures have, of course, been somewhat modified during the past 3 years but the comparative situation remains substantially the same. Notwithstanding the difficulty facing the poorer States, which also I may say are usually the ones which have larger numbers of children to be supported in schools per 1,000 adult population, these States have made extremely valiant efforts to do their full duty with respect to the support of education. We cannot, therefore, blame these States where inadequate opportunities for education exist because of any unwillingness on their part to support education. They have done as much as they can and one might almost say more than they might reasonably have been expected to do.

I have, therefore, come to the conclusion that as much as $500,000,000 per year should be appropriated for the support of education at all levels including aid for needy and capable students in order to enable them to attend universities colleges, and, in some instances, even secondary schools. The GI bill of rights has demonstrated the fact that there are large numbers of young people who will, if they have an opportunity, take advantage of a university or college education and will devote themselves very seriously to the most effective use of such an opportunity.

I believe further, Mr. Chairman, that an equal amount of money, $500,000,000, might well be expended for a limited number of years in the construction of school and library buildings. I do not regard the erection of buildings as being so critical as normal support for education at this time but I feel certain that over the years tremendous improvement in the effectiveness of education can be brought about by special appropriations for the construction of buildings.

In further justification of Federal aid to education, may I now call your attention to a situation which is often forgotten. In 1913, there was passed the sixteenth amendment to the Constitution which very largely took away this tax from the States. I use the words "very largely" deliberately because while the States may legally impose taxes on incomes the fact that the Federal Government possesses this power and has seen fit to use it very extensively reduces the possibility of the States levying the tax effectively. For example, in 1940, 30 of the States collected $205,000,000 in income taxes but even at that time, prior to the war, the Federal Government collected $982,000,000, nearly five times as much. In 1944, the States collected $336,000,000 but, by that time, the Federal Government was collecting $18,262,000,000, or more than 50 times as much as the States were collecting.

There are obvious advantages in having the Federal Government collect uniform income taxes over the country. It makes it possible to collect the taxes where the income is and to use the receipts where the needs are. Among these national needs are a great variety of activities which in the Constitution of the United States are referred to as matters of general welfare including obviously the field of education. It has, therefore, become possible and, it seems to me in every way, desirable for the Federal Government to be tax collector for many activities in the field of general welfare, including education, which are matters which belong primarily to the States and localities to control and finance in large part.

I wish now to addres myself to the matter of Federal control of education. I should like to point out in the first place that there is only one way in which Federal control of educatiou may occur, namely, by the specific provisions which the Congress writes into a law and by the regulations which a Federal agency is permitted to apply under the terms of the law. In other words, it is not likely that there will be any very large amount of Federal control of education unless such control is written into the Federal legislation. Inasmuch as there is nothing on which educators and civilians are more generally agreed than their opposition

to the Federal control of education, I trust that the Congress will be especially careful in avoiding anything of this nature in any bill which may be passed into law. There are, of course, certain exceptions to this general statement. While the Constitution of the United States reserves to the States and to the people those functions, including education, which are not specifically delegated to the Federal Government, there are other provisions in the Constitution conferring upon the Federal Government certain other functions, as, for example, "common defense.' We have just witnessed, during the course of World War II, the fact that the Federal Government may do almost anything it wishes to the educational system of the country in providing for the common defense. There is also the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution, with its equal protection provisions which have been interpreted in recent years by the Supreme Court as permitting the Federal Government to exercise considerable control with respect to education. For example, in one of the interpretations of this amendment, the Supreme Court states that "If a State furnishes higher education to white residents, it is bound to furnish substantially equal advantages to Negro residents though not necessarily in the same schools." I am very clear, therefore, that if the Congress makes appropriations of money to the States for educational purposes, it should do so in such a way as to provide for the protection of minority races, which has been laid down in the several Supreme Court decisions based upon the fourteenth amendment. With the exception, however, of controls of education which are plainly applications of the constitutional authority of the Federal Government I am opposed to the Federal control of education.

For example, it seems to me that it would be extremely unwise to write into the Federal legislation a provision that Federal moneys should be matched by States and localities as was done by some of the earlier acts and as has been done in recent legislation in other fields. It seems very clear that legislation which provides for matching would enable the wealthy States and localities to match Federal appropriations whereas the poorer States, the ones which are in greatest need of such assiatance, would not be able to do so. I wish to point, out however, that in the field of social security and in roads, laws have required the matching of Federal funds. Among other things, it should be apparent to whatever extent the poorer States match Federal appropriations for other purposes they will to that extent be less able to support education or any other kind of activity. We may, therefore, in self-defense have to come to the conclusion that matching Federal funds will have to be resorted to in the support of education unless Federal legislation in support of other activities leaves off this requirement in the future.

In line with the principles which I have just stated it seems to me equally clear that if the control of education is to be left to the States and to the people we should not write into Federal-aid legislation a requirement that these funds must be used either exclusively for the support of the public schools on the one hand or for the private schools on the other. Any provision of this kind in either direction is Federal control of education and thus removes control from the. States where constitutionally it should reside. In other words, I believe that Federal aid should be for education, and that the battle over its use in private schools should be fought out in the several States.

During the past generation, we have had a number of laws placed on our statute books which in one way or another deal with education including the Federal support of education. In other words, we have gone at the matter of Federal relations to education in a thoroughly piecemeal fashion. To date it can be said fairly that there has been nothing in the nature of an over-all comprehensive policy on the part of the Federal Government in its relation to the whole matter of education. I realize that comparisons are invidious but I call your attention to the fact that we have recently witnessed in Great Britain, even during the time when a terrible war was going on, an extensive discussion of the importance of education in the life of Great Britain and, as a result of this discussion, the passage of an act of fundamental importance to eductaion and to the future of the country.

I believe that the time has come for a similar kind of comprehensive consideration of the whole problem of the relation of our Federal Government to education. I hope, therefore, that in your consideration of this problem you will be willing to address yourselves not simply to one aspect of the problem but to what I call a comprehensive consideration of all of the issues which are involved.

Up to the present time, I have been giving to you my own personal impressions with respect to the major issues which are involved in the several bills which are now before the Congress. I wish now to give you the results of the consideration