Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Chairman, that was purely my thought in bringing this to the attention of the admiral and the committee, because unless we do spell it out there within the act-I am not saying we should-unless we do, it is entirely possible that we might have 2,000 more people under the Administrator setting about to do the same thing that this other agency is doing.

Mr. DAWSON. We would always have the power of appropriation. Mr. HARVEY. However,' we have observed, Mr. Chairman, frequently when there was not complete understanding between the Committee on Appropriations and the legislative committee.

I am not assuming this would happen. I am simply mentioning it as a possibility.

Mr. DAWSON. May I ask the admiral a question?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes.

Mr. DAWSON. On page 4 of your statement you say [reading]:

An agreement for the development of a uniform Federal catalog system was reached on June 3, 1948, between the Chairman of the Munitions Board and the Director of the Bureau of Federal Supply, with the approval of the Director, Bureau of the Budget, the provisions of which, in general, are—

and you set them out.

Admiral RING. Yes, sir.

Mr. DAWSON. That is the group that is in operation now; is it not? Admiral RING. That is correct.

Mr. DAWSON. Making this study now?

Admiral RING. That is correct.

Mr. DAWSON. This act has been approved by the Bureau of the Budget, by the Director of Federal Supply, by the Military Establishment, and so forth; and certainly if this is what you are doing now and you are trying to get the legislation, or to get it put into legislation, you have no fear that the same body whom you are cooperating with now will change all this work which you are doing jointly and which you are now here asking to be continued; do you? You have no such belief in your own mind; do you?

Admiral RING. The answer to your question is a little bit difficult, because if you establish an Administrator under section 107 to perform such functions as he deems necessary, going back to Mr. Harvey's question, I have to say that there is no assurance that that Administrator would recognize the worth-whileness of the existing agency set up in here, and would not wish to set up some other agency. I do not know, sir.

Mr. DAWSON. Except insofar as he can do nothing affecting the Military Establishment, contrary to what has been determined by the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense represents all military establishments. There is nothing in this act which will give the Administrator any power to do anything affecting the Military Establishment, and this cataloging you are doing does affect it.

Admiral RING. My only reason for making the statement that I did, sir, was that I was speaking of the cooperative effort with the nonmilitary government agencies which Mr. Harvey addressed his attention to. Mr. DAWSON. The nonmilitary agencies must be represented by somebody. They are represented in this instance by a nonmilitary person, the Administrator. The Administrator will work with the Military Establishment in trying to get a cataloging system that can be used by both the nonmilitary agencies and the military agencies.

However, nothing under here will give him any power to do anything that affects the Military Establishment beyond the judgment of the Military Establishment.

It seems to me to be the only way it can be worked out satisfactorily to the nonmiiltary agencies who must have some representation and the military agencies which, in the final analysis, have the power to determine any cataloging that is adverse to them, and must have it set up to their own use.

So it seems to me that this wording here clearly protects the Military Establishment, but also brings the nonmilitary agencies into the cataloging in a way that is done by this Board composed of a Director of Supplies, who represents them, and the Munitions Board, which represents the military.

Heretofore you said you would be satisfied to do it under the Treasury Department. The Treasury Department has agreed to this bill. So, I do not think that there is any logical ground for fear.

To me, the wording is the best that you can use to set up a joint group to represent both the nonmilitary agencies and the military agencies.

Admiral RING..I agree completely with what you have said, with one minor exception. I do not see that the language of this bill specifically provides for civilian or nonmilitary agency participation through the existing agency of the Munitions Board cataloging agency as we now know it. That is the only difference I have. That does not affect the Military Establishment, whose position is, in my opinion, completely protected by the language here.

Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Chairman, I think there is no difference within the committee itself as to the intent of the bill. However, I have seen it happen so frequently that while we may read the thing in one particular fashion-I have seen perfectly fine laws in the estimation of even the entire body passing it in this difficulty-it immediately becomes interpreted, when it goes into action, in an entirely different

manner.

The only point I made in raising this question was whether the thing we had in mind would also be carried through in the administration as we would contemplate it.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Well, I think the point is well raised. Personally, I am not satisfied with the language in this section, the way I understand it.

I can see a very definite conflict here between the judgment of the Administrator and the Secretary of Defense. I can see where, unless there is some delineation of the authority here, that the whole cataloging effort may break down.

With all due deference to my chairman's explanation here, until I have a little better understanding of this section, why, I am going to seek a little more information on it.

If I understand it right, we are authorizing the Administrator to [reading]:

make surveys of Government property and management practices with respect thereto, and obtain reports thereon from executive agencies; to establish and maintain such uniform Federal supply-catalog system to identify and classify personal property under the control of Federal agencies as may be appropriate; and to prescribe standardized forms and procedures, except such as the Comptroller General is authorized by law to prescribe, and standard purchase specifications.

Now, if he follows through on that authorization as far as all these civilian agencies are concerned, I think we give him that authority. Is that your opinion?

Admiral RING. That is my opinion; yes, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Now, if we are going to have a Federal catalog, and the Secretary of Defense will not go along with him on the different authority which we give him in the language, which I have just read, you have a break there in achieving what we hope to achieve, which is a uniform Federal cataloging system.

Admiral RING. Yes, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I do not know how that can be resolved. I do not know how that can be cured.

Mr. DAWSON. Except that this language gives the Secretary of Defense the power to determine that cataloging affecting the military

agency.

Admiral RING. Yes, sir.

Mr. DAWSON. It gives him that clearly.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes; but I want to point out that the area is not defined in regard to cataloging which will affect his establishment. Mr. DAWSON. Certainly. After you leave the Military Establishment, then there is no veto power left over the Administrator in all other executive agencies.

Certainly he is going to exercise that power. Unless you want to give each head of each department the same thing which you are giving here to the Military Establishment, he is going to exercise that power. There has never been a policy of the Congress, in my knowledge, in relation to the common defense, to give any civilian the power over the Military Establishment, except insofar as we provide a civilian as the head.

Admiral RING. My only difference is this one point: If the Congress seeks to achieve one Federal commodity-catalog system, this language does not insure that there will eventuate one system. That is my point. Mr. DAWSON. Then would you give the entire power of cataloging of all articles used by the Government, military or nonmilitary, to the Military Establishment? Is that your thought?

Admiral RING. My thought is that the present arrangement, satisfactory to the

Mr. DAWSON. Certainly.

Admiral RING. This arrangement working now [reading]:

satisfactory to the chairman of the Munitions Board, to the Director of the Bureau of Federal Supply, to the Director of the Bureau of the Budget—

I guess that is enough, sir. I think that we have a pretty good going organization. I think that it will produce results. We have not yet finished the job.

All I am saying is that the ultimate production of one standard catalog is not insured by this language. It may eventuate. I do not know, sir.

Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Dawson, might I interpose a comment at that point?

Mr. DAWSON. Surely.

Mr. HARVEY. I believe in thinking about the over-all we ought in our thinking to differentiate between the problem of cataloging as such and the ultimate problem of administering of procurement and supply.

Mr. DAWSON. Is there any conflict or doubt in the military mind on procurement and supply? That is not embodied here.

Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Dawson, I believe you were not here this morning when we had some testimony which was very revealing to me, in that it brought out an estimate that a very large percentage of the total purchases, which I believe was about five-sixths

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Six-sevenths.

Mr. HARVEY. Six-sevenths of the entire purchases were by the Military Establishment. That is, of the total of all purchases, about six-sevenths was by the Military Establishment.

To put it rather crudely, the problem that immediately occurred to me is who should be the tail and who should be the dog to wag? Mr. DAWSON. That is right.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is exactly what I am trying to find out.

Mr. DAWSON. As to articles used by the military, there is no question in this language or in this bill that any civilian is given authority over and above the Military Establishment in matters affecting the Military Establishment.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Wait just a minute.

Let me see if we understand. In the first place, there is no clear line between the military items and the common-use items. That is where the argument falls down. That has not been determined.

Mr. DAWSON. But in matters for the Military Establishment the power is given to the Secretary of Defense to have the last word. You may have common-use or non-common-use articles, but for those which affect the Military Establishment the Secretary of Defense is given the last word on matters affecting the Military Establishment, and that is as it should be.

Though this great percentage of the purchases is made by the Army, that is only because the Congress has voted to the Army immense sums of money which enables it to expend this amount, and Congress has given them the jurisdiction over what they choose, but that does not mean that this other one-seventh is not just as essential to the running of the Government in peacetime to carry on the nonmilitary affairs of our Government as the first.

Since there is no conflict with the military, and since you have the last power of veto certainly on matters not affecting the Army, somebody has to have some power.

If you can write out a bill on this whole subject matter which will specify item by item what the Army can buy and what shall be used by nonmilitary organizations, all right; but if you are not going to do that, in order to protect the military, you would give the Secretary of Defense the power to determine all purchases affecting them, would you not? It seems to be that is the only way it can be done.

You are not going to be able to spell out word for word that the Secretary of Defense shall buy this common item, that common item, or this other common item; but you can give the Secretary of Defense power in matters affecting the military to have the last word; and that is how it should be.

Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Dawson, the thing particularly that I tried to emphasize just a moment ago was with reference to the cataloging primarily.

Mr. DAWSON. That is right.

Mr. HARVEY. Not going any further.

Mr. DAWSON. We get down to cataloging and the same thing obtains. On those items for the benefit of the Military Establishment, where there is any difference between the Administrator and the Military Establishment, the Secretary of Defense should determine, and that is as it should be.

Mr. HARVEY. There is no difference in our thinking at all there. This cataloging, as Admiral Ring testified, will take until 1952 to complete.

Mr. DAWSON. That is right.

Mr. HARVEY. The thing that was of first concern to me, considering the cataloging only and not the administration, was that certainly, as has been brought out by Mr. McLeod, and by Admiral Ring, with a few minor variations, the problem is a common one.

Mr. DAWSON. That is right.

Mr. HARVEY. It was my hope, in considering this type of legislation, that at least we might get unanimity so far as cataloging is concerned. Mr. DAWSON. May I show you where unanimity comes in? [Reading:]

An agreement for the development of a uniform Federal catalog system was reached on June 3, 1948

that is, after we had failed to give them money to do it—

between the Chairman of the Munitions Board and the Director of the Bureau of Federal Supply, with the approval of the Director, Bureau of the Budget, the provisions of which, in general, are—

We are proceeding under that now. This bill has been O. K.'d by the Bureau of the Budget, which means the Administration. Certainly the Federal Supply is a part of the executive department, as is the Military Establishment.

Certainly if you are ever going to get cooperation on any one thing you have it here.

You have this bill with the O. K. of the Military Establishment. You have it with the O. K. of the Bureau of the Budget. You have it with the O. K. of the office that represents us, the General Accounting Office.

Each one of these different agencies have gotten together, have agreed upon this bill, and so forth, and so on.

Certainly the President of the United States is interested in doing this job. It was under him that this was done. The Bureau of the Budget proceeded at his direction, because we know that they represent the administration.

So we have this brought in here by them. Certainly they are not bringing it in to undo the work that they have done, and which they have been trying to do and which they have come to Congress for. There is nothing in the wording of this bill that gives us any fear that the Director of the Supply, appointed by the President, who is interested in doing this job, is going to stop this work or retard this work which is so necessary at this time.

We have to put this in some kind of wording. You cannot find any better wording with more backing and less dispute, except from those people who have a fear that there may be a possibility that between now and 1952-and I do not think there will be by that time-this whole thing will be upset. Certainly it will not happen between now and 1952. If so, this bill would not be here in this way.