DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, AND
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WEL-
FARE APPROPRIATION BILL, 1961

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I call
up the conference report on the bill
(ELR. 11390) making appropriations for
the Departments of Labor, and Health,
Education, and Welfare, and related
agencies, for the fiscal year ending June
30, 1961, and for other purposes, and ask
unanimous consent that the statement
of the managers on the part of the
House be read in leu of the report.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Rhode Island?

There was no objection.

The Clerk read the statement.

(For conference report and statement,
see proceedings of the House of August
24, 1960.)

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, when this
bill, making appropriations for the De-
pariments of Labor, and Health, Hduca-
tion, and Welfare, and related. agencies,
was approved by the House of Repre-
sentatives it carried a price tag of $4,184
‘million. That was $164 million above the
budget figures and it was my opinion
then that it was too rich.

Now the bill comes back to us today
from the other body and we find it calls
for the spending of $4,354 million in this
fiscal year or $334 million abcve the
budget figures.

This is budget busting with a ven-
gence. .

It should be remembered, too, that this
is the bill which provides funds for the
National Defense Education Act under
which fellowships are financed for stud-
ies such as comparative literature, the
theater, home economics, animal ecology,
the ecology and economics of flowing
waters, political science, music, and folk-
lore. What a study of the theater, music,
folklore, and all the rest have to do with
national defense has mever been ex-
plained. sO

This is the appropriation which also
provides severai thousand dollars for a
study of dog discipline; a, $50,000 grant
for a study of bird sounds; a $30,000
study of the circulatory physiology of the
octopus, and 2, $33,000 grant to a foreign
university for a study of both the intra-
personal and interpersonal aspects of the
role of relationship of husband and wife.

These are but a few of the inexplicable
grants made under the appropriations
to these departments and related agen-
cies.

Mr. Speaker, I could not support this
bill when it was before the House and

- exceeded the budget figures by $164 mil-
lion. It is unthinkable that it should
come back to us from the other body and
the conferees should ask us to support it
with increases which bring it $334 million

‘above the budget recommendation.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

I say again that this is budget busting
at its worst and I want my vote recorded
in opposition.

The conference report was agreed to.

The SPEAKER, The Clerk will report
the first amendment in disagreement,

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 2: On page 2, line
17, insert the following:

_ “WORKING CAPITAL FUND

“The paragraph under this head in the
Depariment of Labor Appropriation Act, 1958
(71 Stat. 210) is amended to read as follows:

“Working capital fund: There is hereby
established a working capital fund, to be
available without fiscal year limitation, for
expenses necessary for the maintenance and
operation of (1) a central reproduction serv-

- ice: (2) a central visual exhibit service; (3)

a central supply service for supplies and
equipment for which adequate stocks may
be maintained to meet in whole or in part
the requirements of the Department; (4)
a central tabulating service; (5) telephone,
mail and messenger services; (6) a central
accounting and payroll services; and (7) 4
central laborers’ service: Provided, That any
stocks of supplies and equipment on hand
or on order shall be used to capitalize such
fund: Provided further, That such fund
shall be reimbursed in advance from funds
available to bureaus, offices, and agencies for
which such centralized services are per-
formed at rates which will return in full all
expenses of operation, including reserves for
accrued annual leave and depreciation of
equipment’.”

' Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a
motion, and on that motion I ask recog-
nition to explain the conference report.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 2 and concur therein,

 

CALL OF THE HOUSE

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thought
we were to have an explanation of this
bill before the conference report was
voted on. /

Mr. Speaker; I make the point of order
that a quorum is not present. _

The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum
is not present. ,

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move a
call of the House.

A call of the House was ordered.

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed te answer to their
names:

[Roll No. 193}

Alexander Holifield Morrison
Barden Holt Murray
Baumhart Ikard Nix

Blitch Kearns Norrell
Bolling Kilburn Passman
Bowles King, Calif,. Patman
Celler King, Uteh Powell

Davis, Tenn. Kirwan. Preston
Dixon Landrum Quie

Durham Lipscomb Rains

Glenn Loser Rogers, Mass.
Goodell McDowell Shelley
Grant McSween Smith, Kans.
Gray Magnuson Taylor, N.Y.
Healey Mahon Thompson, La.
Hébert Mitchell Vinson

Hess Moeller Withrow
Hoffman, Tl. Morris, Okla. :

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. AL-
BERT). On this rolicall 378 Members
have answered to thelr names, a quorum,

By unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.

August 25

DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, AND
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WEL-
FARE APPROPRIATION BILL, 1961

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I was
on my feet at the time the conference
report was adopted, in order to give a
brief explanation, but apparently did not
make it clear that I desired recognition.
I would, therefore, like to explain it at
this time. :

This is a unanimous conference réport.
Hvery member of the conference signed
it. As is always the case, there were
some members of the conference that felt
that the appropriations were too high in
some areas, and others felt they were too
low, but we were all agreed that a good
compromise resulted from the four
sessions that we held. .

The total of the bill as it passed the
House was $4,184,622,731. As it passed
the Senate the total was $4,485,788,931,
or an increase over the House bili of
$301,766,200. The conference agreement
totals $4,354,357,931, or $131,431,000 less
than appropriated by the Senate bill.

There were 83 Senate amendments to
the bill. Most of them involved rather
small amounts. The large increase was
in the Public Health Service. In the field
of medical research alone the House bill
provided $455 million for the National
Institutes of Health. The Senate bill
increased this figure to $664 million, or
an increase over the House bill of $209
million. Soin this one field the increase
accounts for over two-thirds of the total
increase for the whole bill. The con-
ference agreement was $560 million, or a
decrease of $104 million below the Senate
bill, and $105 million over the bill as it
passed the House. This represents ap-
proximately two-thirds of the total
amount by which the entire bill is now
over the amount passed by the House last
March.

Another significant item in conference .
was for hospital construction under the
Hill-Burton program. The House orig-
inaliy provided $150 million for this pro-
gram, and this was increased by the
Senate to $211,200,000, or an increase
of $61,200,000. The conferees adopted
the figure of $186,200,000, which keeps the
amount at the same ievel as for last year.
This is an increase of $36,200,000 over
the Flouse bill and $25 million under the
Senate bill. These two items, the Na-
tional Institutes of Health and the hos-
pital construction program, account for
over 80 percent of the increase provided
by the conference report over the bill as
it originally passed the House.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. I yield.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan.
much was it over the budget?

Mr. FOGARTY. It is $334,135,950
over the budget. :

Mr, GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman. yield?

Mr. FOGARTY, I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. I thought this bill was
exceedingly rich when it left the House
at $4,184 million. Now it is $164 miilion
above the House figure, and $334 million
above the budget recommendation,

How
1960

Mr. FOGARTY. As I tried to explain
at that time, it was a compromise that
we reached in the House last March.

Some of us wanted to include more in.

the House bill than we did and cthers
wanted to spend less, but we came out
with a unanimous report: on the agree-
ment that was reached. Then the other
body increased it by $300 million. After
four long sessions, we have finally made
this compromise.

Mr. GROSS. Mr, Speaker, will the
gentleman yield further?

Mr, FOGARTY... Lyield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.

Mr, GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I am op-
posed to this bill and-I ask unanimous
consent to extend my remarks imme-
diately prior to the vote on the adop-~
tion of the conference report.

The SPEAKER. Without obligation,
it is so ordered,

There was no objection.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. I yield to our dis-
tinguished chairman.

Mr, CANNON. Mr. Speaker, the fol-
lowing tabulation shows up-to-date com~<
parison with the President’s budget re-
quests for the session on the appropria-
tion bills. At the insistence of the other
body, the 16 bills thus far cleared, in-
cluding the excessive Labor-HEW total
reported in this morning’s Rrcorp, ex-
ceed the corresponding budget requests
to $301,807,547. Excessive nondefense
appropriations pushed the total over the
budget.

The two bills—public works and mu-
tual. security—-on which conferences are
being held today offer the last prac-
ticable opportunities to bring the total
under the budget requests.

At a time when our gold reserves are

continuing to dwindle, when the cost-of-
living hits a new high nearly every 30
days, when the buying power of the
dollar is less than half what.it was only
a few years back, when business profits
on which the Treasury heavily depends
to help pay the bills are slacking offi—
the situation demands that we stay
within the budget.
The tabulation follows:

Status of the appropriation bills for the
86th Cong., 2d sess., as of Aug. 25, 1960

 

Bills com- Bills come
pared with pared with
House budget

 

Net total for the 16 ses-
~ _ sion bills enacted.
Loan authorizations
Pending:

1, Public works, as
passed by the .
Senate-..-.--- +9118, 211, 620

2, Mutual security,
as passed by
the Senate......

As the bills
now stand
(appropria-
tions) ....n-2--

-|4-$301, 807, 547
(+211, 400, 000)

 

 

4-25, 869, 425

+899, 304, 000 | —292, 650, 000

 

+514, 515, 620 | 266, 780, 575

 

 

 

Nore.—Supplemental bill is yet to come.
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND REMARKS

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that all Members
may extend their remarks on this bill or

CON GRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

have 5 legislative days in which to extend
their remarks.

The SPEAKER. Without objection,
it is so ordered.

There was no objection.

Mr. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. I yield to the ‘gentle-
man from Colorado.

Mr. CHENOWETH. -I would like to
inquire of the distinguished chairman of
the committee with reference to the stu-
dent loan fund. What disposition was
made of that title? :

Mr. FOGARTY. Last March, when
the bill passed the House originally, we
gave the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare everything that they
asked for. They told us at that time that
they would probably have to come back
for a supplemental appropriation. That
will be taken up on tomorrow in connec-
tion with the supplemental appropriation
bill. Itis not in this bill.

derstand correctly that there will be
funds in the supplemental appropriation
bill for the student loan fund?

Mr. FOGARTY. The bill is to be re-
ported tomorrow and so I cannot answer
the gentleman at this time.

Mr. TABER. Myr. Speaker, if the gen-
tleman will yield at that point, as I un-
derstand the situation, if amendment No.
16 is adopted, they can spend anything
they like. I did not understand that
that was brought up with the idea that it
was going to be agreed to.

Mr. FOGARTY. May I say to my dis-
tinguished colleague, the gentleman from
New York, that that is in another area
and will be charged against next year’s
appropriation,

Mr. TABER. Yes: but it is not limited.

Mr. FOGARTY. It is the same as we
are doing with reference to social se-
curity grants for public assistance and
other similar programs. ‘Then the ad-
vances are charged against the appro-
priation when it is made. This is what
it says on page 20 of the bill “to be
charged to the appropriation for. the
same purpose for that fiscal year.” _

That is the language of the bill.

Mr. TABER. Yes; but there is no
limitation on what they can spend and
while it might be charged to an appro-
priation, obvicusly, they can go ahead
and. spend anything they like.

Mr. FOGARTY. The limitation is
there since they cannot spend more than
what the Congress appropriates. If they
spend more in that first quarter, than
they. should, then they are going to have
to make up for it by cutting back the
rest of the year.

Mr. TABER. It is a contract on the
part of the Congress to provide the
money and we cannot get out of it.

Mr. FOGARTY. We do this for the
Social Security Administration and the
Bureau of Employment Security in con-
nection with their grant programs and
we have not had any problems with ref-
erence to it.

Mr. LAIRD. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr, FOGARTY. I yield.

Mr, LATRD. Is the intention made
clear here that it is not a contract au-

Mr. CHENOWETH. ‘Then, do I un-

16437
thority and that a contract could not
be read into this? ~ &

Mr. FOGARTY. No.

Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. Iyield.

Mr. TABER. Under this provision in

amendment 16 they are authorized to

take the money out of the Treasury, and
there is no way to get it back after they
receive it.

Mr, CEDERBERG. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. Tyield,

Mr. CEDERBERG. Do I understand
that the 15 percent overhead has been
maintained in this conference report?

Mr. FOGARTY. That is right.

Mr. CEDERBERG. .I have had some
serious reservations as to the advisability
of expanding some of these programs as
rapidly as we have. In talking with
some of the administrators.of schools in
the administration of these research
grants it seems to me we could well give
consideration next year to increasing the
indirect costs but not accelerating the
actual grants as we have been in the
past.

Mr. FOGARTY. I appreciate the gen~=
tleman’s remarks, and I think maybe .
something should be done, but perhaps
in the other direction. A study has just
been completed under a grant made by
the National Institutes of Health that
dealt with the. question of overhead
costs. I would like to read it, because
there is a serious question raised by this
grantee as to whether any overhead costs
ought to be paid.

Mr. CEDERBERG. The gentleman
knows probably better than.I do that the
determination of costs is not uniform,
not the same for different departments
of Government, not the same for the
National Institutes of Health, for in~
stance, as for the military. Different
formulas are used. It seems to me desir-
able to have uniform treatment in this
regard, Some administrators of schools
have serious reservations as to the ade=-
quacy of 15 percent.

Mr. FOGARTY. I thank the genile-
man.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to dis«
cuss in a little more detail the action
taken with respect to the appropriations
agreed to forthe National Institutes of
Health,

THE BASIS FOR AGREEMENT

First, I should like to emphasize that
I believe there is almost complete agree-
ment between the House and the Senate
eoncerning the basic philosophy under
which the Federal Government should
act in respect to medical research. ‘This
was reflected in the attitude of the con-
ferees from both Houses in their discus-
sions of the items that were in disagree=
ment in this bill.

Their attitudes reflected complete
agreement upon the significance of
medical research, upon the objectives to
be sought, and in general upon the ap-
proaches which should be followed in
attaining such objectives.

The basic problems which the cone
ferees faced were to find a financial plan
consistent with these agreed-upon. basic
16438

principles and that was also realistic in
terms of operational requirements.

I should like, as I did last year, to re-
port to the House the gratification I exe
perienced in participating with the
immediate members of the Senate and
my distinguished colleagues in the House
in the conference discussions concerning
these medical research. appropriations.
There was, as. always, a forthright ex-

change of views which, as I have said,
' did not differ in respect to basic prin-

ciples but only in honest attempts to de-
termine the optimum level of support
of these programs in order to achieve the
most effective results.
The conferees have agreed to accept
a figure of $560 million as the total for
the several appropriations of the Na-
tional Institutes ef Health in fiscal year
1961. This amount is $104 million under
the amount in the Senate version of this
bill and $105 million above the allowance
originally made by the House in its pas-
sage of this bill. It is, however, -$160
million greater than the amount which
the President had requested for these
appropriations in his budget last Janu-
ary.
MEDICAL RESEARCH AND THE NATIONAL BUDGET

To those who are concerned about this
increase I should like to say this: The
President’s budget proposals for fiscal
year 1961 in the field of medical research
in essence set forth the point of view
that the development of medical re-
search in the United States should not
be accelerated. This view, I am afraid,
was based wholly upon fiscal considera-
tions.

The Congress this year, as it has in
past years, has again emphasized that
maintaining the existing level of our na-
tional medical research effort is a com-
pletely unwise, if not. disastrous, course
of action to follow.

We cannot stand still in our search
for knowledge. We cannot mark time
or restrain research because of con-
trived fiscal reasons or for misleading
arguments that research is inflationary
or that there are economic obstacles
which stand in the way. This attitude,
I believe, reflects an utter and complete
misunderstanding of the meaning that
medical research has for the Nation.

It is my. view, and I believe the view of
this Congress, that a strong and sus-
tained and increasing medical research
effort is sound national economics. The
effect of medical research is not infla-
tionary, nor does it threaten progress in
other areas of our national economy.

The ultimate product of medical re-
search is an enlargement of the wealth
of this Nation. This wealth comes from
the increased national productivity
which derives from a well population,

from reducing the loss in energy and .

creativity resulting from disease, and the
longer effective lifespan of our people.
This Nation new spends over $21 bile
lion for doctors bills, for the operation
of hospitals, for the purchase of drugs

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

and medicines, and other forms of medi-
cal care and health services. This vast
national expenditure is a burden which
ean be substantially modified if we can
move forward with our medical research
programs,

BETTER HEALTH AND GREATER PRODUCTIVITY

Medical research can change in a rad-
ical and revolutionary manner the whole
pattern of medical care, hospital serv-
ices, and heaith practices. The achieve-
ments and the progress that is possible

‘as a result of research findings can dras-

tically reorder the nature of health man-
power requirements and the whole pat-
tern of medical, hospital, and health
services and expenditures of the Nation,

This is not only possible, but it has
happened, and happened numerous
times. Outstanding instances of the
revolutionary consequences of the find~
ings of medical research are the follow-
ing:

First. The whole character of the
treatment of infectious disease has
changed, the great threats that the
pneumonias and other dangerous infec-
tions posed in the past have been almost
completely dispelled: by the emergence
of the antibiotics. This is the result of
research efforts. On the other hand,
the common cold still costs the Nation
as much as $2 billion a year in industrial
absenteeism,

Second. We have witnessed in the past
few years the diminishment of tubercu-
losis as a major cause of death and ill-
ness in this country. as a result of the
development of new drugs effective in
the care of this dreaded disease. The
whole structure of hospitalization in the
Nation has changed as a result, Large
numbers of tuberculosis hospitals
throughout the country have closed or
been converted to other uses and all the
health manpower, nurses, technicians,

and physicians, once demanded for the .

treatment of tuberculosis, have now di-
rected their skills and energies to other
urgent health and medical care prob-
lems. On the other hand, recent in-
creases in the attack rate of cancer of
the lung places this condition foremost
in the causes of death from lung ine
volvements.

Third. We are witnessing today a
basic change in the approach to the
treatment of mental iliness as a result
of the remarkable discovery made con-
cerning the relationship of drugs and
psychological and psychiatric conditions.
For the first time we have seen the total
pepulation of our mental institutions
decrease and we are looking forward,
as a result of the intensified efforts in
this area engendered by the actions of
the Congress of the United States, to new
and heartening prospects in the solution
of the problems of mental illness. This,
again, is an achievement of medical re-
search that is reshaping the entire char-
acter of our community health efforts
and. recovering for the Nation the vast

detailed

August. 25

creative potential of these once ill minds.
Nonetheless, the mentally ill still occupy
one out of two hospital beds throughout
the country, and in the aggregate this
group of illnesses cause the taxpayer
the loss of approximately $2.5 billion.
On the basis of these few isolated but

dramatic instances of the influence and

effect of medical research on the one
hand and of the problems yet to be solved
on the other, it is possible to see that the
continued movement forward in medical
research holds the promise of completely
transforming the balance of national ex-
penditures and productivity in the fu-
ture. The concept that we must main-
tain the line on expenditures for medical
research, is the same as saying that we
must stop now, not pursue the promising
jeads that have opened in respect to the
viral origin of cancer, nor seek virus vac-
cines to. control the common cold, we
must not expand our effort to under-
stand the biochemical basis of schizo-
phrenia, we must stop now our prom-
ising inquiry into the nature of heart
disease. That we must mark time, hold
opportunities that now beckon in abey-=
ance and direct our attention to a budget
balance sheet. To do all this is to deny
the strength and promise of our scien~
tific capability.

It is not the role of medical research
to wait. The promise of the future is
too bright and too great.

Medical research is a revolutionary
force. It can change in a radical manner
the level of national productivity, the life
expectancy of our people, and our pros-
pect of well-being.

This progressive decrease in the rav-=
ages of disease, the tragedy of premature
death, and the progressive increase in
the productivity of our people and our
Nation is to me an objective without
parallel when we consider what our na-
tional purpose should be.

It is toward this end which we are
moving in the level of appropriations
which I present here to you today as a
result of the House and Senate confer-
ence on the Labor-Heaith, Education,
and Welfare appropriation bill,

A budget of over a half a billion dol-
lars for the National Institutes of Health
is a complicated matter. It cannot be
inteHigently considered except through a
consideration of its. various
parts. The following table will in sum-
mary indicate the nature of the confer~
ence agreement.

I should like to emphasize that the
specific amounts set forth in this table
for the individual program elements
comprising the several appropriations are
not intended to be fixed or absolute levels
of expenditure for the individual items.
When changing operating circumstances
require, I believe it important to leave it
up to the good judgment of the program
operators to make such adjustments in
these amounts as is necessary in the in-
terest of effective progress and prudent
utilization of rescurces.
 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1960 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ~~ HOUSE 16439
7
Budget esti- | House allow- |. Senate allow- Senate ine Conference...
mate ance ance greases agreement *
Grants for research and training:
a Research projects at 15 percent indirect COStS..._ 0... 2---enneneeseneneenceecnccencen $205, 589, 000 $235, 189, 000 $262, 389,000 | -+$27, 200, 000 $260, 000, 000
(a) Increase required to pay 25 percent indirect costs.....---------eeceeeewecnne= 0 22, 681,000 +22, 681,000 |... n en we
2, Research tellowships..---.-.-.------------ 14, 570, 080 15,070,000 22, 500, 000 -+7, 430, 000 20,000, 600
(a) 1960 unpaid, approved applications. (5, 444, 948) eee eee eee seen eee feceneo--------
3. Training grants 66, 894, 000 78, 894, 000 128, 991,000 “+50, 097, 000 110, 000, 000
(b) Increase provided for forward notification on gradu: 0 (9, 565, 000) (16, 445, 000) (+6, 880, 000) (16, 445, 000)
State control programs__-.._.-.-... 10, 375, 000 12, 975, 000 18, 475, 000 +500, 000 13, 000, 000
Community demonstration projects. 1, 500, 000 1, 500, 000 1 625, 000 +125, 000 1, 500, 000
Clinical research centers. . - 3, 000, 000 3, 000, 000 55, 060, 000 +52, 000, 000 20, 000, 600
Primate center: 2, 000, 000 2, 000, 000 12, 000, 08 -F10, 000; 000 7,000, 000
Construction of cancer research facilities. ...220 0 5, 600, 000 =5, 000, 000 5, 600, 000
Cancer and mental-neurology buildings constru 0 0 12, 839, 000 +12, 839, 000 12, 839, 000
Total, extramural ProgtaMs. _.nnmmnncceco nsec eee au cameos eeneeuscaccevascoscaneawsanas 303, 928, 000 353, 628, 000 531, 500,000 | +1177, 872, 000 449, 339, 000
Direct operations: .
4, Chemotherapy contracts_..-...-20ccucncenncenncaueeenenensewenauescecabecnneaewanas 21, 145, 000 21, 145, 000 23, 140, 000 oF1, 995, 000 21, 500, 000
2, Other direct operations... .-nocecanececc sae acees dees nee a neat en nnen ene nn oem nme oes 74, 927, 000 80, 227, 000 83, 860, 000 +3, 633, 000 82, 161, 000
Total, intramural programs- » _ - 96, 072, 000 101, 372, 000 107, 000, 000 oF-5, 628, 000 103, 661, 000
New areas:
1, Medical librartes...... a 9 9 , 000, 000 £5, 000, 000 Qe
2, Communications research and translation.....-.-02-ce-cecee een en eee eee en eenoennen= 0 9 4, 500, 060 “+4, 500, 000 0
3. Instrumentation research. _ _ = 0 0 , 000, 000 5, 000, 000 0
4, Career development_-_-.--.-. a 0 0 4, 000, 000 +4, 000, 000 2, 000, 000
&, International medical research... o 0 7,000, 000 +7, 000, 000 5, 000, 000
Total, new areas... : 0 0 25, 500, 000 +25, 500, 600 7, 000, 000
Grand total... “400, 000, 000 455, 000, 000 664,000,000 } -+209, 000, 000 560, 000, 000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I should like to éxplain for the infor-
mation of the House, the basis of the
conference action in each of the major
NIH, functional areas and relate the
amounts proposed for these areas to the
levels contained in the appropriation bill
passed by the House earlier in the year.

RESEARCH PROJECTS

A total of $260 million is provided to
be utilized for the making of grants in
support of medical research projects car.
ried out in. the wniversities, medical
schools, and research institutions in the
country. This amount will provide the
funds necessary to continue the research
programs which are now underway sup-
ported by NIH grants in these institu-
tions and in addition permit the award-
ing of grants for most new applications
received during fiscal year 1961 which

. withstand the rigorous scientific review
carried out by the NIH review bodies
and which are recommended for pay-

. ment as being important to the solution
of major disease problems by these sév-
eral National Advisory Committees of
the NIH.

This total increase in funds for re-
search grants should be viewed in terms
of the important areas of research in-
quiry which will benefit. A very. few of
these areas selected as examples of both
past progress and present opportunity
would include viruses and the cause of
eancer, radiation and the treatment of
cancer, drugs and the mentally ill, sur-
gery and heart disease, dental caries and
infectious agents, causation of arthritis
and drugs for treatment, arteriosclerosis
and strokes and a whole host of such
practical problem areas as mental re<-
tardation, drug addiction, alcoholism, to
say nothing of the pressing medical
problems of our elder citizens.

: . FELLOWSHIPS

A total of $22 millicn is provided for
the support of research fellowships in
fiseal year 1961. This program of re=
search fellowships is an essential activ.
ity directed toward the developn

  

‘manpower of the future. .

the supply of senior teachers and re-
search investigators which will be
needed to staff the medical schools and
research laboratories of the future. This
allowance will permit the payment of
substantially all the backlog of unpaid~
approved fellowship applications now in
hand and extending the senior fellow=
ship awards to include the clinical areas.
It will also permit providing broader
support for medical students and enlarg-
ing the foreign fellowship program. This
amount also includes $2 million for the
awarding of approximately 100 research
fellowships as @ means of establishing
research professorships to enlarge op-
portunities for stable careers in academic
medicine and research.
TRAINING GRANTS

An amount of $110 million is provided
for the support of training grants to sup-
port training in the sciences and disci-
plines basic to medicine and medical re-
search where shortages continue to exist
in terms of current needs and to provide
for enlargement of the trained research
Included in
this amount is sufficient funds, estimated
at $16.4 million, to permit reordering the
payment periods for training grants
which will allow such grants to be made
on a forward payment basis—an arrange=
rent necessary to permit proper plan-
ning and effective conduct of these pro-
grams.

Important areas of manpower develop-
ment which will be benefited by this m-
crease in training grant funds include:

Investigators in the sciences funda-=
mental to clinical medicine.

Experimental approaches to providing
greater research and scientific content to
the training of physicians.

Research pharmacologists in the field
of mental disorders.

A wide range of specialized manpower
contributery to cardiovascular research.

Virologists, immunologists, and ime
munochemists whose work is basic in
the fields of infectious diseases and al-

lergies, and now of crucial importance to
virus-cancer investigations.

Investigators able to pursue genetic
phenomena, at the molecular level.

Biophysicists and biochemists who
can pursue the basic phenomena of
chemical and energy transformations at
the cellular level.

Research neurophysiologists and
neurosnatomists essential to the re«
search attack upon the disorders of vision
and cerebrovascular diseases.

CLINICAL RESEARCH CENTERS

A major feature of the conference
agreement is the provision of funds for
several special programs which had been
included in the Senate-passed version of
the appropriation bill and had their ori-
gins in the extensive recommendations
made by the Jones committee. Most im-
portant amongst these special programs
is the designation of $20 million for the
further development and support of a
program for the establishment of large-
seale clinical research centers through-
out the country This program has its
origins in the efforts made by the Na-
tional Institutes of Health to provide
support for a series of clinical and meta-
bolic research facilities undertaken. in
fiscal year 1960.

During this past year some eight
grants, totaling approximately $3 mil-
lion, were made to eight medical institu-
tions in the country. These grants pro-
vided funds for the establishment of
specially designed clinical and metabolic
research facilities, staffed and equipped
to meet the growing needs of programs
involving research investigations in the
clinical area. This program has met
with enthusiastic support and approval
in the research community of the Nation.
The Jones committee report called for
an enlargement of this program to per-
mit the establishment of broadly based
clinical research centers. It is intended
that these centers will provide a stable
framework in which a variety of medical
and scientific disciplines can be organ~
16449

ized for. a concentrated attack upon
smajor disease or health problems, All
laboratory and clinical facilities. and
supporting services necessary for the
research program to be carried out would
be encompassed within such centers.

The Senate-passed version of the bill
provided $55 million for these research
centers. The conferees have agreed that
a level of $20 million is perhaps a more
realistic and feasible level to initiate
what undoubtedly will be a substantial
program of great importance to the fur-
ther development of medical research in
the Nation.

PRIMATE RESEARCH CENTERS

A total of $7 million is provided for the
further development of centers for re-
search utilizing subhuman primates.
This program was begun in fiscal year
1960 when $2 million was made avail-
able. These funds were granted for the
establishment of a large primate center
near Portland, Oreg. This center will
make available several species of pri-
mates in adequate numbers and with
appropriate facilities to meet the needs
of scientists engaged in research requir-
ing the use of primates. Although the
‘Senate proposed a level of $12 million
in fiscal year 1961 for this purpose, the
conferees agreed that $7 million, a re-
duction of $5 million from the Senate al-
lowance, but an increase of $5 million
over the House allowance, would be an
adequate amount. to satisfy the more
urgent needs in this area during fiscal
year 1961. On the basis of experience
gained in this more modest initial effort,
it will be possible to develop an appro-
priate goal in this important program
area.

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH

The conferees also agreed that special
emphasis in fiscal year 1961 should be
given to the further extension of NIH
research programs through support of
investigators in foreign countries work-
ing in fields important to the program
objectives of the several institutes. The
Senate allowance for this purpose to-
taled $7 million. The conferees agreed
that $5 million was a more appropriate
amount for this purpose. In the con-
ferees’’ view this: amount should be
utilized in addition to current funds now
being utilized for research support of
foreign investigators.

CONSTRUCTION

A total of $12,839,000 is provided for
two important building projects at the
National Institutes of Health: $12,139,-
000 of this amount will be for the plan-
ning and construction of a joint mental
health-neurology basic science labora=
tory. building; $700,000 is intended to be
utilized for the planning of a new build-
ing to house cancer research activities
at NIH. ‘These projects will provide the
means to deal with the increasingly diffi-
cult problems of space shortage which
are hampering the progress of research

activities at the Bethesda installation

of NIH. /
A special item of $5 million has been
_ ‘provided in the cancer appropriation to
' be utilized for taking care of a special
need in the development of cancer re-

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

search facilities which require non-
matching funds.

The conferees agreed to allow the full
authorized maximum of $30 million to
be used for matching grants for research
facilities construction under the health
research facilities construction program.
This amount was previously allowed in
both the Senate- and House-passed ver-
sions of the bill, but is an increase of
$5 million over the President’s budget
request.

I have attempted in the foregoing to
single out the major elements of in<
crease in this over important series of
appropriations. Both the Senate and
House reports contain observations con-
cerning the views of Congress on the
direction and emphasis which should be
given in. the development and conduct
of these national research programs.
The National Institutes of Health is ex-
pected to pay careful attention to these
observations in the planning and devel-
opment of its programs during the forth-
coming year.

(Mr, YATES asked and was given per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point.)

Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, I want to
commend the gentleman from Rhode
Island [Mr. Focarry], and all the mem-~-
bers of the subcommittee, for the very
fine bill they have brought in, . One item
particularly is of vital importance to
the people of Chicago, namely, the ap-
propriation of $500,000 to undertake a
study of water pollution in the Great
Lakes and the Illincis Waterway. The
total cost of this survey as estimated
by the Department of Health, HEduca-
tion, and Welfare is $12 million. The
fund approved by this bill permits a sig-
nificant start on that survey.

I stated that this appropriation is of
vital importance to the people of the
city of Chicago, but that is an inade-
quate understatement. Actually, this is
a national bill, It is of vital importance
to the people living on the Great Lakes
because it seeks to protect that vital
water. resource for the enjoyment of
those living today, and for future gen-
erations to come. It is of importance to
all the people of our Nation, not only in
the preservation of the. waters of the
Great Lakes but. because of the essential
scientific information the study will
elicit. For decades literally, a harassing,
vituperative verbal and legal batile has
been fought between the States border-
ing on the Great Lakes and the people
of Chicago. Chicago needs the waters
of Lake Michigan to live. Chicago needs
such waters to dispose of it sewage and
waste so that its peopie may continue
to grow and prosper.

Years ago, when the city’s pollution

was discharged into the lake, it con-.

taminated the drinking water and epi-
demics of typhoid ravaged Chicago’s
population. It was only when the flow
of the Chicago River was reversed and
a portion of Lake Michigan’s waters were
diverted to move the waste along the
Iinois Waterway, that Chicago’s health
problem was solved.

Water is a precious resource and the

‘opposition of our sister States to our

withdrawal of water can be understood if

August 25

not appreciated. They have flung re-

' eriminations against the people of Chi-

cago charging that we are stealing water
from the Great Lakes, which is untrue.
The water has not been stolen. It has
been withdrawn pursuant to authority
granted by the Federal Government.
The fact remains that the disputants -
have been at loggerheads. The effort has
been made to withdraw. an additional
1,000 cubic feet of water from Lake Mich-
igan as an experiment for 1 year to de-
termine whether such withdrawal wotid
have any. harmful effects upon Chicago’s
sister communities on the Great Lakes.
Objection to the proposal has been vio~
lent, not only in.the debates in the Halis
of Congress, but in the courts in a suit
filed by a number of the States in the
Supreme Court of the United States to
require Chicago to return its sewage into
the Great Lakes.

This appropriation approving the
study brings the olive branch of peace te
the dispute. For the first time the par-
ties will be able to obtain tangible facts
where speculation and estimates existed
before. For the first time actual meas-
urements can be. taken of the effect of
the diversion on lake levels and upon
harbor, shipping, and power facilities.
For the first time, a scientific study will
be made of lake currents and drifts to
ascertain the situation in the lower end
of Lake Michigan to determine whether
sewage may be safely returned therein
or whether the method now used by the
city in washing it along the Illinois Wa-
terway is not only the preferable method
but the only feasible method.

The time for accusations, for invective,
for playing politics with the diversion
issue is over. This is. the time for coop-
eration and working together, for pur-
poseful mature effort to obtain the basic
information which will permit everyone
to know what to.do and to take the steps
necessary to preserve this vital water
resource and the health of our communi-
ties.

(Mr, HOFFMAN of Michigan asked and
was given permission to extend his re-=
marks at this point.)

(Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan’s re-
marks will appear hereafter in the Ap-
pendix.]

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I move
the previous question,

The previous question was ordered.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 5: Page 6, line 2,
insert “including conveyance by the Com-
missioners of the District of Columbia to the
United States of title to the land on which
such building is to be situated,”:

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
@ motion.

The Clerk read as follows: |

Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 5 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.

The. SPEAKER. The Clerk will re-
port the next amendment in disagree-
ment.
1960

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment Wo. 16: Page 14, line 14
insert:

“PHARMACOLOGICAL“~ANIMAL LABORATORY
BUILDING

“Bior plans and specifications for a special
pharmacological-animal laboratory for the
Food and Drug Administration, $150,000.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
@ motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr, Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to-the amendment of
the. Senate numbered 9 and concur therein,
with an amendment, as follows: In leu of
the sum named therein, insert “$100,000.”

The motion was agreed to...

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows: .

Senate amendment No. 16: Page. 19, line
25, insert “Grants, loans, and payments un-
der the National Defense Education Act, next
succeeding fiscal year: For making, after
May 31 of the current fiscal year, loans, and
payments under all titles of the National

. Defense Education Act, for the first quarter

of the next succeeding fiscal year such sums
as may be necessary, the cbhligatons incurred
and the expenditures made thereunder to be
charged to the appropriation for the same
purpose for that fiscal year.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
& Motion.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 16 and concur therein.

Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, will the

gentleman yield?
Mr. FOGARTY. Ivyield.
Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, this

amendment provides, as follows:
Grants, loans, and payments under the
National Defense Education Act, next suc-
ceeding fiscal year: For making, after May 31
of the current fiscal year, loans, and pay-

ments under all titles of the National De-

fense Education Act, for the first quarter of
the next succeeding fiscal year such sums as
may be necessary, the obligations incurred
and the expenditures made thereunder to be
charged to the appropriation for the same
purpose for that fiscal year.

Under this amendment No. 16 there is

-@arte blanche authority given to the

agency to do what it pleases and incur
any. liability it might want to and take
the money out of the Treasury. Frankly,
so far as I am concerned, I am not pre-
pared to let any agency have that au-
thority, therefore I hope the Housé will
refuse to approve this motion.

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr.
language is exactly the same as that
carried in the bill in previous years for
grants made by the Bureau of Employ~
ment Security, and we have also done
it for social security programs. If we
do not do this it will be impossible for
the program to operate in these colieges
where the students are asking for loans
if the appropriation bill is late next year.

Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. TIyield to the gentle-
man from New York. /

Mr, TABER. If we are going to do
things this way and allow them to take

the money right out of the Treasury, —

there is no restraint whatever.

Speaker, this -

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -—- HOUSE

“Mr. GROSS.
gentieman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. This would permit them
under the National Defense Education
Act to grant funds for the study of the
theater, music, jazz, and the policy and
economics of flowing water, and all that
sort of thing, is that correct?

Mr. FOGARTY. This bill does not
govern that at ail. The basic legislation
governs that.

Mr. GROSS. They have made grants
for fellowships for the study of those
things. .

Mr. FOGARTY. I think the genitle-
man did a very good job when the bill
was.on the floor in bringing to light some
of these problems. I assume they have
corrected any weaknesses because of the
gentleman’s interest in the program.

Mr. GROSS. Under the language of
this amendment they can go even fur~
ther.

Mr. FOGARTY. This would allow the

Mr. Speaker, will the

students to get these loans even if the’

annual appropriation bill is late in being
passed and thus enable the administra-
tors and the schools and colleges operat-
ing under. the program to carry out a
better program.

Mr. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Colorado.

Mr. CHENOWETH.
inquire if the adoption of this amend-
ment will make available sufficient funds
for the applications of these sttidents
for loans?

Mr, FOGARTY. No. That will be
taken up tomorrow in connection with a
deficiency appropriation bill. There is a
request pending before that committee to
increase funds for student loans. That
will be taken up at that time. This per-
tains to the first quarter of the next fiscal
year, .

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Myr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Michigan.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. From
what the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Taper] said, as I understand it under this
bill this group could go direct to the
Treasury and get their money. I assume
that the House has something to do with
appropriations. I understood the. gen-

-tleman to say earlier that the Senate

increased the bill we sent over by some=
thing like $500 million, is that right?

Mr. FOGARTY. It was not quite that
much.

Myr.
much?

Mr. FOGARTY. The Senate increased
the bill by a little over $300 million.

Mr. HOFFMAN. of Michigan. Three
hundred million dollars. I thought they
had in their bill $500 million and you cut
it down or your committee cut it down to
$300 million?

Mr. FOGARTY. Tmentioned a figure
of $664 million for the National Insti-
tutes of Health. We cut that figure by
$104 million.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. My in-
formation is that over the years every
bili we sent over there they up it; is that
not right?

HOFFMAN of Michigan. How

I would like to.

16441

Mr. FOGARTY. We think we didia
pretty good job in reaching the compro~
mise we did this year.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. In real-
ity we do not have tco much to say about
how much is appropriated.

Mr, FOGARTY. We do by our votes.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?

Mr. FOGARTY. Tf yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman
know of the other body ever cutting this
particular appropriation bill?

Mr, FOGARTY. Not this one. This
affects every section of our. society. It
affects human beings. It is a popular
field. The people are vitally affected
and so are interested in these programs,

Mr,GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will not
the gentleman agree that it also affects
the taxpayers of the country?

Mr. FOGARTY. Yes. And Iam sure
the taxpayers are willing to pay for this
kind of a program, because in the end
it is going to save them money.

Mr. Speaker, I move the previous
question.

The previous question was ordered.

The SPEAKER. The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman
from Rhode Island.

The motion was agreed to,

The SPEAKER. The clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, on that
motion I call for the yeas and nays,

The SPEAKER. Well, it appears to
the chair that the gentleman’s request
comes rather late. The chair has al-
ready declared the motion agreed to and
ordered the clerk to report the next
amendment in disagreement,

 

CALL OF THE HOUSE ;

Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, I make the
point of order that a@ quorum is not pres<
ent.

The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum
is not present.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I
move a call of the House.

A Gali of the House was ordered.

The Clerk called the roll, and the
following Members failed to answer to
their names:

[Roll No. 194]

Alexander ' Healey Morrison
Alger Hébert Murray
Ayres Hess Nix

Barden Hoffman, Til, Norrell
Baumhart Holland Passraan
Blitch ikard Powell

Boggs Jones, Ala. Preston
Bolling Kearns Quie

Bowles Kilburn Reece, Tenn.
Boykin King, Calif, Rogers, Mass.
Buckley King, Utah Shelley
Cahill Landrum - Sisk

Celler Loser Smith, Kans.
Cooley McDowell Taylor, N.Y.
Curtis, Mass. McSween Teague, Tex.
Davis, Tenn. Magnuson Thompson, La.
Durham Mahon Vinson
Glenn Metcalf Whitener
Goodell Mitchell Widnall
Grant Moeller Withrow -

The SPEAKER. On this rollcall, 374
Members have answered to their names,
a quorum.

By unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with,
16442

DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, AND
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WEL-
FARE APPROPRIATION BILL, 1961

The SPEAKER. .The Clerk will report ©

the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 21: Page 22, line 18,
strike out “for research, training, and trainee-
ships, and other special project grants, pur-
suant to section 4 of the Vocational Rehabili-
tation Act, as amended, for”, and insert “for
grants and other expenses for research, train-
ing, traineeships, and other special projects,
pursuant to section 4 of the Vocational Re=
habilitation Act, as amended, for expenses
of.’?

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Focarty moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 21 and concur therein
with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of

the matter stricken and inserted by said.

amendment, insert the following: “For grants
and other expenses (including not to exceed
$150,000, in addition to funds provided else=
where, for administrative expenses) for re-
search, training, traineeships, and other spe-
cial projects, pursuant to section 4 of the
Vocational Rehabilitation Act, as amended,
for expenses of”.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 23: Page 24, line 4,
insert “expenses incident to the dissemina-
tion of health information in foreign coun-
tries through exhibits and other appropriate
means;”’.

_ Myr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 23 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 24: Page 24, line 20,
insert “Provided, That section 208(¢) of the
Public Health Service Act, as amended, is
amended by striking out ‘eighty-five’, and in~
serting in lieu thereof ‘one hundred and
fifty’, and by striking out ‘seventy-three’
and inserting in lieu thereof ‘one hundred
and fifteen’;

Mr. FOGARTY. Myr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
_ Mr. Fogarty moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 24 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 40: Page 30, line
5, insert “: Provided further, That this ap-
propriation shall be. available for medical,
surgical, and dental treatment and hospitali-
gation of retired ships’ officers and members
of crews of Coast and Geodetic Survey ves-
sels, and their dependents, and for pay-
ment therefor.”

Mr. FOGARTY... Mr. Speaker, I offer a
motion, —

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE

ea

The Clerk read as follows:
Mr, Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 40 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 44: Page 32, line
2, insert “not to exceed $2,500 for entertain-
ment of visiting scientists when specifically
approved by the Surgeon General;”.

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 44 and concur therein,

The motion was agreed to.:

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 46: Page 32, line
23, insert “, of which $700,000, to remain.
available until December 31, 1961, shall pe
available for plans and specifications for a
research facility for the National Cancer TIn-
stitute.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.

The Clerk read as folows:

Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 46 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows: .

Senate amendment No. 56: Page 34, line
13, insert:

“CONSTRUCTION OF MENTAL HEALTH-NEUROLOGY
RESEARCH FACILITY

“Por construction of a combined basic and
collaborative research facility for the Na-
tional Institutes of Mental Health and
Neurological Diseases and Blindness, includ~
ing a physical biology component, and in-
cluding plans and specifications, fixed and
semifixed equipment, access roads and park-
ing facilities, extension of existing power, re-
frigeration and other utility systems, $12,
139,000, to be derived by transfer from ‘Men-
tal health activities’ and ‘Neurology and
blindness activities’, as determined by the
Surgeon General.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 56 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re-
port the next amendment in disagree-
ment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 64: Page 45, line
16, insert:

“WORKING CAPITAL FUND

“The paragraph under this head in the
Federal Security Agency Appropriation Act,
1953 (66 Stat. 369) is amended to read as
follows:

“working capital fund: There is hereby
established a working capital fund, to be
available without fiscal year limitation, for
expenses necessary for the maintenance and
operation of (1) a central reproduction serv-

August 25

ice; (2) a central visual exhibit service; (3)
a central supply service for supplies and
equipment for which adequate stocks may
be maintained to meet in whole or in part
the requirements of the Department; (4) a
central tabulating service; (5) telephone,
mail, and messenger ‘services; (6) a central
accounting and payroll service; and (7) &
central laborers’ service: Provided, That any
stocks of supplies and equipment on hand
or on order shall.be used to capitalize such
fund: Provided further, That such fund
shall be reimbursed in advance from funds
available to bureaus, offices, and. agencies
*for which such centralized. services are per-
formed at rates which will return in full all
expenses of operation, including reserves for
accrued annual leave and depreciation of
equipment’.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 64 and concur-therein.

The motion was agreed to. .

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re-
port the next amendment in disagree-
ment. :

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 80: Page 52, line
15, insert:

“Sec, 903. Appropriations contained in this
Act available for salaries and expenses shall
pe available for payment in advance for dues
or fees for library membership in organiza-
tions whose publications are available to
members only or to members at a price lower
than to the general public and for payment
in advance for publications available only
upon that basis or available at a reduced
price on prepublication orders.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
a motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Fogarty moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 80 and concur therein.

The motion was agreed to.
The SPEAKER. -The Clerk will re-
port the next amendment in disagree-

“ment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Senate amendment No. 82: Page 52, line 3,
insert:

“Sec. 905. Appropriations contained in this
Act available for salaries and expenses shall
be available for expenses of attendance at
meetings which are concerned with the func-
tions or activities for which the appropria-
tion is made or which will contribute to im-
proved conduct, supervision, or management
of those functions or activities.”

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I offer
@ motion.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr, Focarry moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate numbered 82 and concur. therein.

The motion was agreed to.

A motion to reconsider the votes by
which action was taken on the several
motions was laid on the table.

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to include extrane-
ous matter in my remarks on the con-
ference report just agreed to.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Rhode Island?
19860 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE 16443

There was no objection.

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
may have permission to extend their re-
marks in the Recorp on the bill just
passed,

The SPEAKER, Is there objection to
the request of the gentleraan from
Rhode Island?

- There was no objection. :

My. BROYHILL. Mr. Speaker, I
should like to commend the members of
the House conferees and the members .
of. the House Committee on Appropri-
ations, and particularly the gentleman
from Rhode Island (Mr. Focarry], on
agreeing to the Senate amendment in
adding funds for schools in impacted
areas. Unfortunately, there has been
a perennial problem concerning Public
Laws 815 and 874, in explaining to the
membership that this is not Federal aid
to education or a Federal handout as
such, but is simply a program by which
the Federal Government can meet a
portion of its obligations to the various
communities in which its agencies are
Jocated. Obviously, when the Federal
Government becomes a principal indus-
try in a community and does not pay
taxes for the land it owns as other in-
dustries must do, there is a deficiency in
the economy of that community to
vender the services that must be pro-
vided as a result of the existence of the
industry in the area. One of the most
vital services which must be provided is
an adequate public schcol system.

Yet, as I stated above, in spite of the
simplicity of this obligation, it scems
necessary to explain the problem over
and over again. Fortunately, the Con-
gress has repeatedly recognized this re-
sponsibility and has continualiy granted
the appropriations pursuant to the act
as well as renewed and extended the
act on previous occasions.

The problem that exists here today is
the fact that even though we recognize
the responsibility from time to time, we
fail to appropriate the full amount
which is authorized and the amount to
which the communities would be en-
titled under. the formula agreed upon.
This makes it extremely difficult for the
communities involved to fermulate a
sound budget or financial program. It
is, therefore, imperative for the Con-
gress to state what it intends to. do and
fulfill its promises in a way in which
the communities can count on these
funds. The action taken by the con-
ferees to eliminate the current defi-
ciency, I am certain, will help many
communities involved in overcoming @
serious problem of meeting a deficiency
in the school budget for this current
year.

a ETL TONE LET