required to transport labor from southern borders to meet an emergency we did not create any more than Southern States did. Fairness to all areas requires imported labor be available to all, not just an importation subsidy for border States. We urge amendment to Senate bill 984 to cover internal transportation or adoption of Senate bill 1106. PICTSWEET FOODS, INC., The CHAIRMAN. I wish to ask that there also be incorporated in the record at this point a letter addressed to me and dated March 11, 1951, offering certain suggestions as to the pending legislation, and signed by Mr. J. L. Nairn, McAllen, Tex. There is attached to his letter a statement entitled "The President's Commission on Migratory Labor" by himself, and dated October 16, 1950. I will ask that the statement simply be filed with the committee for reference. (The letter referred to is as follows:) Hon. ALLEN J. ELLENDER, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. TEXSUN CITRUS EXCHANGE, DEAR SENATOR ELLENDER: Please accept my thanks for your letter of the 5th enclosing copy of S. 984 which I have studied carefully. I appreciate the opportunity of submitting to you my comments and recommendations. As indicated in my previous letter and enclosures there are, in my opinion, two additional paramount needs that should be met in order to get the support of farmers in States along the Mexican border. In the provision for negotiating agreements or arrangements for employing foreign workers, section 506 (3), I think that a stipulation should be added stating, in effect, that "except as provided in this bill, no arrangements shall be made pertaining to the employment of foreign agricultural workers that will require employers to grant such workers wages, terms, or conditions of employment superior to those commonly given to domestic workers with similar qualifications and doing similar work in the respective areas of employment." Without such a provision, those who negotiate for us will always be subject, as they have in the past, to demands from foreign governments for additional benefits that are not available to American workers. Criticism of the present agreement is widespread for that reason. Consequently I think that this basic provision should be part of the law. The second need is to legalize the status of the considerable number of Mexican workers and families who have seeped into the border area in past years and have remained here. To some extent at least their presence has been condoned, particularly when their labor was needed in the production and harvesting of crops. They are not migrants but rather settlers without the status of legal entrants. Their human rights as well as the need of farmers for their labor on a year-round basis deserve consideration. Under the provisions of the bill such persons might be considered eligible for contracting, section 501 (1). However in becoming contracted for short periods they would be returned to Mexico on the completion of their contracts. Moreover, if present policies are followed, the wives and families would be deported immediately. Under these circumstances it is obvious that they will, in most cases, refrain from being contracted just as they have under the present agreement. I understand that this subject was discussed in the Mexican conferences and that the Mexican officials were insistent that such persons should not be allowed to stay here indefinitely unless they would become United States citizens—a view that seems to me to be most reasonable. The joker is that they cannot become United States citizens until their entry has been legalized. Most of them would welcome the opportunity to do so. This could be remedied by a simple amendment to the immigration law that would exempt from the usual entry requirements such Mexicans, who have entered the country prior to, say, January 1, 1949, and who have remained here substantially all the time since then. If this can be made a part of your present bill it would be most constructive, otherwise it should be dealt with separately. These matters are discussed more fully in the attached marked copy of the paper I gave you in Mexico. I am submitting these comments on behalf of the grower members of Texsun Citrus Exchange to the end that your legislation may get the cooperation of farmers in the areas affected. Thanking you for your courtesy and with kind regards, J. L. NAIRN, The CHAIRMAN. A few days ago I suggested that we obtain for the record a résumé of the expenses and other matters pertaining to the farm labor supply program as operated during the calendar years 1943, 1944, 1945, and 1946. In answer to the request I received a letter from Mr. É. J. Overby, assistant to the Secretary, dated March 14, attaching thereto a summary together with a chart outlining the number of persons that were serviced in each year, together with the cost per year. In this connection I wish to point out that the cost to the Federal Government for the year 1943 was $17,072,063; for the year 1944, $31,982,880; for the year 1945, $30,395,897; for the year 1946, $26,758,120; and for the calendar year 1947, including liquidation of projects, $19,194,070. (The documents referred to are as follows:) Hon. ALLEN J. ELLENDER, United States Senate. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington 25, D. C., March 14, 1951. DEAR SENATOR ELLENDER: Complying with your request made on March 13, during the hearing on proposed farm legislation, there is transmitted herewith a short statement regarding the need for overnight rest camps for migrant agricultural workers. This is in answer to the question raised by Senator Thye relative to the attitude of the Department as to the need for such facilities. It is hoped that this short statement will adequately answer his question. Sincerely, EDWARD J. OVERBY, THE NEED FOR OVERNIGHT REST CAMPS FOR MIGRANT FARM WORKERS (By Edward J. Overby, Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture) Migratory agricultural workers travel thousands of miles over America's highways each crop season in performing the many jobs required in the production of food and fiber. (See attached map.) Most of this travel is performed in automobiles and trucks and in many instances over long distances between areas of employment. Many migrant workers cannot afford the use of facilities such as tourist camps, motels, etc., and therefore do not have access to bathing and laundry facilities, sanitary toilets, restaurants, etc., which are available and used by the average traveler. These workers stop in out-of-way places, along the roadside, or in the outlying edges of the towns and cities, hoping that they will not be molested during the night by law-enforcement officials. This practice creates many sanitary, social, and law-enforcment problems. The experience of the Department of Agriculture during the war period demonstrated that the provision of limited facilities for use while en route, and located at strategic points on highways heavily traveled by migrants contributed much to the orderly movement and improved the morale of this segment of the farm work force. Such facilities included, in addition to a place to stop, with ample parking space, some shelter, usually an open front shed under which cars and trucks could be parked during bad weather, adequate toilets, water for laundry and bathing use, cooking facilities such as outdoor ovens or stoves and fuel. These bare -essentials made it possible for the migrant worker to maintain health and sanitary -standards, and to be accepted in the local grocery store, barber shop, movies, and other places of business. Experience in Texas with such centers during the war, through the cooperation and financial help fo farmers, local civic organizations, |