and professional division, and with a faculty well prepared in subject matter and in professional education, the base of a multipurpose institution of higher education, as authorized in S. 293 already exists in the District of Columbia Teachers College.

And, Mr. Chairman, I emphasize that for the simple reason that there may be some who will say that it is a very big undertaking to attempt to organize a college at this time from ground up and that it would almost be beyond the capacity of the District of Columbia to do that.

What I am saying here is that the basis for the 4-year liberal arts college already exists; the fact is, I think this would be an easier transition than to establish a junior college with the occupational curriculums. Both can be done.

Senator MORSE. I quite agree with you, and furthermore, we have just been locating these new colleges from the surface of the ground on up all over the country where they do not have the foundation to build on what you have here in the form of the teacher's college.

I think it is a much easier task here than in the other places where they have started from scratch.

Ďr. CARR. Thank you.

The faculty, the library, the subject matter offered is already very commendable. There is one thing we do need, and that very badly, and that is a new plant in order that we can manage the type program that is envisaged in the President's Committee Report and in S. 293.

I would like to mention, however, that the time has come when the need for a new physical plant is imperative for the District of Columbia Teachers College, if it is to continue to function as an institution of higher education.

The present buildings are obsolete and worn out. Would it not make sense to build a new college of arts and sciences which would include a program of teacher education instead of building another single purpose teachers college? The answer is obvious.

States and municipalities are no longer provincial, but maintain a relationship in the ends they seek to higher education. Modern mobility is such that an architect educated in Oregon may serve the people of Kentucky or a scientist educated in Virginia may use his scientific knowledge in Colorado.

Individuals educated in any part of the country may serve in some other area or even in another land. Thus, every State has the responsibility to provide diversified education for its citizens so that not only the Nation but the world may benefit from their education. And the District must share in this responsibility through its system of public higher education.

The States over the years have found no substitute for publicly supported higher education for their citizens and neither can the District of Columbia.

Both public and private institutions are needed in our complex civilization. Each has and will continue to make a distinct contribution in services to youth and adults. It is, I believe, an accepted fact that a democartic system of higher education need not accord all students the privilege of attending the same kinds of institutions any more than it need permit all to pursue the same curriculum.

The important thing is that equal opportunity is accorded to every

American to attain the highest level of education of which he is capable.

Education is the most profitable investment society can make and the richest reward it can confer.

In conclusion, a community college and a college of liberal arts and sciences, under public sponsorship, would greatly expand educational opportunities for the residents of the District of Columbia.

The accelerating expansion of knowledge, the growing complexity of our society, and the rapid advances in technology call for persons with high levels of educational preparation.

Individuals must be prepared to meet the problems of the community in which they live and of the world which they will inherit and help to shape. We cannot wait until tomorrow to educate for tomorrow's needs.

Already the District of Columbia has waited too long to expand its publicly supported higher education. It is imperative that the city and the Congress provide resources at once to carry out the recommendations of the President's Committee on Public Higher Education in the District of Columbia.

Otherwise, higher education opportunities will remain considerably limited for many individuals in this community, especially for those who come from low-income families.

Colleges planned to meet the needs of the youth and adults of the District would be a powerful factor in helping thousands of individuals realize their full potential.

Mr. Chairman, I urge the favorable action of this committee on S. 293 without delay.

(Resolution previously referred to follows:)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TEACHERS COLLEGE,
Washington, D.C., January 11, 1966.

Memorandum to: Dr. Paul O. Carr.
From: Executive committee, District of Columbia Teachers College Faculty
Organization.
Re endorsement of S. 293.

The executive committee of the District of Columbia Teachers College Faculty Organization, recognizing the great need for public-supported higher education in the District of Columbia and noting the faculty's unanimous vote on January 5, 1966, endorsing the idea of public-supported higher education in the District of Columbia, hereby endorses bill S. 293 which was introduced January 6, 1965, by Senator Morse to authorize the establishment of a public community college and a public college of arts and sciences in the District of Columbia.

Very truly yours,

Mrs. BARBARA K. STATHIS, Chairman.

Mrs. ESTELLE C. EPSTEIN, Vice Chairman.
Mrs. GUINEVERE D. WHITE, Treasurer.

Mrs. JUANITA D. FLETCHER, Member, Ex Officio.
Mrs. LOUISE J. HUBBARD, Secretary.

Senator MORSE. Thank you very much, Dr. Carr. Thank you very much, Reverend Hewlett and Dr. Hansen.

We stand in recess until 9 tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the hearing was recessed to reconvene at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, March 15, 1966.)

60-755-66- -9

AUTHORIZATION OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC LIBERAL ARTS AND JUNIOR COLLEGES

(S. 293 and S. 1612)

TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 1966

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH, EDUCATION,

WELFARE, AND SAFETY OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met at 9 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 6226, New Senate Office Building, Senator Wayne Morse (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senator Morse.

Also present: Chester H. Smith, staff director; Fred L. McIntyre, counsel; Richard E. Judd, professional staff member.

Senator MORSE. The hearing will come to order.

We are honored to have as our first two witnesses Commissioner Tobriner and Commissioner Duke. You gentlemen may take the witness stand. It is always a pleasure for me to have any and all of you before

me.

STATEMENT OF WALTER N. TOBRINER, PRESIDENT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS; ACCOMPANIED BY BRIG. GEN. C. M. DUKE, ENGINEER COMMISSIONER, AND SCHUYLER LOWE, DIRECTOR, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

Mr. TOBRINER. In his recent message on the District of Columbia Budget, President Johnson stated

that the District can and should be an example of the best among our urban communities, but in many ways the District continues to fall short of that goal. The way to educational equality and eventually to excellence for the District of Columbia was outlined in 1964 by the President's Committee on Public Higher Education. Approval of legislation which this committee is considering today, would mean a large, tangible step toward the system of higher public education which the President's Committee identified as a basic educational necessity for the District and every modern urban community. The Commissioners fully support the recommendations of the President's Committee. The Commissioners favor the principles of both bills being considered by this committee, but support the administration bill (S. 1612)

because it has a more effective and functional relationship between the District Commissioners and the proposed Board of Higher Education. This need has been highlighted and accentuated by the number, complexity, and scope of new Federal grant programs enacted by the Congress. Increasingly, the need for closer coordination of urban functions becomes paramount. The objectives of the proposed Demonstration Cities Act of 1966 also point up this need. The Commissioners on May 18, 1965, reported on S. 293 and on February 10, 1966, a report was offered on S. 1612.

Although we concur in the objectives of S. 293, that is, the establishment of a public college of arts and sciences and a public community college, we believe that the general concept of S. 293 fails to provide for the effective coordination of higher education needs with the many other needs for which the Commissioners have a more direct responsibility.

With regard to the judicial branch of the Government appointing members of the Board of Higher Education, it is to be noted that this practice is almost nonexistent elsewhere in the United States. The attached extract from the Education Record of October 1961 brings this out.

In the District of Columbia, Mr. Chairman, there exist several fine private institutions of higher learning. We, in Washington, can look with pride to the educational institutions that have grown and developed here-institutions that attract students from all the States in our Nation and many of the nations of the world. Yet there is a glaring deficiency in higher education in this city.

Here in our Nation's Capital, where great advances in our elementary and secondary school education are in evidence, we do not have a system of public higher education that is available to the ever-increasing numbers of young residents who cannot afford the spiraling costs of private higher education.

There is no public institution of higher learning that offers a baccalaureate degree program, and there is no public community college to provide either a general or technical educational program.

There is only an antiquated and overused facility known as the D.C. Teachers College-an institution, which within its limitations, has fulfilled its commitment over the years, and is now certainly unable to educate the growing numbers of students who seek higher education in the District of Columbia.

The plight of public higher education in the District is cast in sharp relief when compared to facilities in the six American cities which most nearly equal this city in population. With only 1 exception, each of the comparable size cities has 2 or more institutions of public higher education with an average enrollment of 11,000 students. In fact, it is easy to find smaller cities that have postsecondary public facilities. For example, San Diego with a population of only 573,000 has 4 publicly supported institutions which accommodate more than 20,000 students.

There are exactly 11 States in the country which rank below the city of Washington in the number of persons in the age group of 15 to 24 years the group from which come the young people who seek and must have the benefits of higher education.

In other words, Washington's educational needs are not only more