Page images
PDF
EPUB

property for educational use. We have had some other agencies of the Government manifest an interest in making their contributions of excess surplus property which is no more use generally to the Government, to their agency, and has no more use to the other establishments, and we know that the schools can use it, or a major portion of it.

We are interested in making it possible for the different governmental agencies, at the discretion of the administrative office, to donate such of that property as may become available. That is the purpose of the bill, H. R. 3238, which the chairman has introduced, and we would like very much to see that protection in this proposed legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I think briefly that covers our statement. We will prepare for the committee, be glad to at your request, a brief of what I have tried to give to you verbally here, and place that in your hands.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I would like to have a written brief with the contents of the amendments which you have suggested and the acts to which it will apply outlined for the benefit of the committee.

Mr. MOORE. I will be glad to give that to you.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. As to amendments to the bill which I introduced ?
Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. That has been referred to the Armed Services Committee, and I believe that some action will be taken on that bill either by the Armed Services Committee, or for referral back to this committee.

Mr. MOORE. I might say that we have information that it has been referred to the Armed Services Committee, which will handle it. We are to have a conference with the subcommittee possibly this afternoon, late this afternoon.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. These suggestions, Mr. Moore, will be looked into by our committee. We will also want to get the expression of views from the Bureau of the Budget, as we should, on the amendments, and also as to whether they should be included in this proposed bill or should be considered in a separate bill.

Mr. MOORE. We appreciate that, and I might make this statement that the same general problem that we have been going over here has been taken up with the Senate committee and the committee over there is considering the same thing. It is our hope that the measures can be brought into line, both the House and the Senate measures, in such way that they will not require any reconciliation by the committees.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Are there any questions from members of the committee?

Mr. Harvey. How much are you presently acquiring in materials?

Mr. MOORE. We are still acquiring materials under these two programs. We are acquiring real property through the War Assets Disposal program. They are still disposing of real property, which was declared to them prior to June 30, 1948. We are acquiring personal property from the armed services, through the donations program, under Public Law 889.

Mr. Harvey. You are still acquiring considerable property materials now?

Mr. MOORE. Yes; we are. The committee might be interested in knowing that since the inception of the donation program there has been approximately $140,000,000 worth, acquisition cost, of property transferred to education on a strictly donation basis by the armed

services, and I would like to make this statement that there is no way of estimating the benefits to education in terms of dollars and cents. You would have to come out and see what has been done under this program, with this property, to realize what it has meant to the school people.

Take a refrigerator, for instance, that is banged up and looks as though it has no eventual value, and it is taken off the hands of the armed services, and taken to one of these vocational shops, where it is reworked and comes out as a useful unit to go into a cafeteria or a lunchroom, thus providing two uses-one, it gives an opportunity to

— the youth in the vocational school who do this work to receive trade training, and it has another useful purpose of helping out in the lunchroom or the cafeteria, as the case may be. And that illustration can be multiplied by many types of property that has been used.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Moore, we thank you for your suggestions, and we assure you that the committee will give close consideration.

I might point out this factor that is involved, the matter of policy as to whether it should be included in this bill or handled separately, and also refer to the subsections you have indicated, since the present law pertains to the Army, Navy, and Air Force disposal of surplus property directly to the ultimate receiver, and that that policy be extended to the several executive agencies. There is some conflict in that, in that the present bill seeks to have these executive agencies declare that property to the central agency, and then after screening by the Government agencies, make it available to non-Federal agencies, I should say. That element is involved, and I think we will have to have some more information before we can decide, and with the permission of the committee we will have some further studies of this proposal and also as to whether it will have to be considered by the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, may I say just one other thing?
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes.

Mr. MOORE. There would be no difference from the condition that exists now. The property, that is, the excess property and surplus property, is screened by other branches of the Federal Government before we ever know that it is excess. In other words, it is actually excess to the Government's needs before we ever get a chance to see it.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is true, but I was referring to the principle involved in this bill.

Mr. MOORE. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Which seeks to correlate the disposal activities under one head.

Mr. MOORE. Yes.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. I think that is a point that will have to be considered.

Mr. MOORE. Yes. There is one other point I would like to make: Indirectly there are two distinct programs. The donation program does not cover real property and never has covered real property. We have only been able to get real property for education through the public beneficiary load through the surplus-disposal program.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is right.

Mr. MOORE. There is no provision made in the donation law, and none is anticipated, to cover real property.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much for your statement, Mr. Moore.

Mr. MOORE. Thank you; we appreciate the opportunity to appear.

STATEMENT OF MAXWELL H. ELLIOTT—Continued

[ocr errors]

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Elliott, is there any further statement you wish to make ?

Mr. ELLIOTT. With reference to the matter presented to the Budget: That was brought to our attention at the last hearing, but I have not had an opportunity to discuss it with them at this hearing, but I shall be glad, if the committee wishes, to make a statement now giving our informal conclusion.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I think probably we will have this matter considered by the FWA and the Bureau of the Budget, and you may present the statement to the committee, if that is agreeable with you, Mr. Elliott.

Mr. Elliott. I would like to say at this point for the record, while Mr. Moore was testifying, I was thumbing through the bill which was worked out by the subcommittee last year, and I was unable to find the amendment which Mr. Moore spoke about.

Mr. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, may I make a correction about the amendment being included in the bill? It was in the hearings on the bill.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much, gentlemen. If there is nothing further the committee will adjourn subject to the call of the Chair.

(At 11:30 a. m. the committee adjourned subject to the call of the Chair.)

FEDERAL PROPERTY ACT OF 1949

FRIDAY, APRIL 8, 1949

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE REORGANIZATION

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON
EXPENDITURES IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS,

Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a. m., in room 1501, New House Office Building, Hon. Chet Holifield (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. The subcommittee will come to order.

We are gathered here this morning to have additional testimony on H. R. 2781 which seeks to reorganize and simplify the procurement, utilization, and disposal of Government property and for other purposes.

We are fortunate this morning to have with us one of the former members of this committee and a member of the Rules Committee, our colleague, Hon. Clarence J. Brown. Mr. Brown is also a member of the Hoover Commission, one of the two Members of Congress that received the honor of being appointed to this great task.

Mr. Brown, we are glad to have you with us this morning and we will ask you to testify in your own words for as long as you like. We are all glad to listen to you.

a

STATEMENT OF HON. CLARENCE J. BROWN, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. Brown. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman; it is good to get back in this room where I enjoyed very much my service on this important committee. Before discussing the problem at hand, I would like very much to compliment the committee and its chairman, Mr. Dawson, and the subcommittee which is headed by yourself for the work that you are doing in actively attempting to put into effect the recommendations and findings of the Hoover Commission, tempered of course by your own wisdom and good judgment.

While I understand that this hearing this morning is directed specifically to H. R. 2781, I feel that perhaps my comments must be of a general nature which will go beyond the provisions of this bill itself.

I have not had an opportunity to study this measure as closely as I would have liked, but as I understand it, H. R. 2781 would create an administration or an agency of the Government for the purpose of simplifying procurement, utilization, and disposal of Government property.

« PreviousContinue »