the national average. The 1962 rate among construction craftsmen other than carpenters averaged 8.8 percent, among carpenters 9.4 percent, and among construction laborers 20.4 percent. We need the school construction for its own sake, but the healthy effect in terms of employment is an added benefit which should not be overlooked.

The administration's plan further provides that Federal funds may be used to meet the special needs of children in slum schools, depressed areas, and migratory labor camps. Improving the educational opportunities for such deprived children is an urgent need.

One of the President's recommendations would indirectly be of great benefit to elementary and secondary schools, both public and private, and that is the provision of grants for the improvement of teacher training. The AFL-CIO, in testimony last year, noted the extent to which teachers of social studies are poorly prepared, few States requiring them to have taken even one formal course in college economics. Many union members have expressed dismay at the confused ideas about organized labor that their children develop in school. An important reason is that the teachers who are supposed to educate our young people about economic and social problems are ill-equipped to do so. The proposals advanced by the administration could do much to improve the teaching in America's schools.

In requesting a continuation of the existing program of aid to federally impacted areas, the administration has made one specific recommendation which we vigorously support, the inclusion for the first time of the District of Columbia.

Taken all together, these proposals would constitute an important step toward a revitalized system of elementary and secondary education. But there is one respect in which the administration's program for elementary and secondary schools needs to be strengthened. No American, whatever his religious beliefs, can fail to realize the extent to which nonpublic schools carry a large share of the burden of educating the young. These nonpublic schools face many of the same crises confronting the public schools. We believe that nonpublic elementary and secondary schools should receive as much assistance as is constitutionally possible.

Private nonprofit schools are presently eligible for National Defense Education Act loans to assist in procuring equipment for teaching science, mathematics, and foreign languages. The constitutionality of this program is by now well established. We urge a considerable expansion of this program. At the present time the NDEA loans are available only for equipment; we propose that they be made available also for the construction of classrooms to be used for the prescribed subjects. We also urge that the teaching of English and social studies be added to the present list of subjects for which NDEA loans are permitted.

Several of the President's proposals deal with problems of vocational education, a field of special concern to organized labor. They will be dealt with in a separate statement.

Three proposals advanced by the President have to do with adult education. One is to make Federal grants available to stimulate the establishment and the expansion of publicly supported programs of university extension education for adults. Union members have benefited greatly from the extension programs already underway and we have long supported expansion of present facilities. A second proposal would provide funds for establishing basic education programs for adults who have completed less than 8 years of school. This is also a matter of close concern to organized labor, inasmuch as experience indicates that many workers are unable to benefit from job-retraining programs because they do not have enough basic education.

A third proposal would make grants available for the development of public libraries. The public library is one of the most useful sources of continuing education for most workers, but many communities have inadequate libraries and 18 million Americans have no library services available to them at all.

America has become a mobile nation. The poorly educated child of one The entire State may grow up to become the unemployed worker of another. Nation suffers when the educational facilities of any part of the Nation are inadequate. On the whole, American communities and States have made a great effort to meet their educational needs, but it has not been enough. When States and communities have unequal financial resources, equal educational opportunity is possible only through Federal action. The Federal Government alone has the taxing power needed to make equal opportunity a reality in elementary and secondary education, higher education, and adult education.

Whether Congress approaches the problems of education through such an omnibus bill as the administration has suggested, or whether it breaks the problem up into its several parts, President Kennedy, by suggesting the omnibus approach, has dramatized the extent to which these separate parts are in fact portions of a single whole. The foundations of education are laid in the elementary schools. The secondary schools build upon these foundations, preparing young people for future jobs and for further education. The colleges and universities prepare the teachers for those schools and they supply the advanced education which is an increasingly vital factor in all phases of American life. And adults who once thought of education as something for their children are discovering that they too need continuing education throughout their lives. Altogether, our educational needs add up to a tremendous challenge which must be met by such a major effort as President Kennedy has outlined in his message to Congress.

STATEMENT OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES

H.R. 3000 implements the panoramic view of the needs of education expressed in the President's message to the Congress on January 29, and assumes the necessity for and wisdom of Federal assistance in improving American education on all fronts. The several proposals of this bill further assume sufficient comprehension of the relative importance of each program proposed to warrant a wide variety of loans or grants made available on a variety of formula bases, with varying degrees of local and/or State effort required to activate the programs.

JUSTIFYING RESEARCH LACKING

The Chamber of Commerce of the United States believes the above assumptions to be unsound and finds little research evidence to justify Federal decisions of such far-reaching influence.

In fact, the Special Subcommittee on Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor last year requested a thorough evaluation of existing Federal programs in this field to determine what achievements and general influence on education these programs were having. At the same time, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare recognized the inadequate evaluation available on Federal programs in vocational education and set up a panel of consultants to review and evaluate such Federal programs.

The multitude of proposals in H.R. 3000 appear to have been made without the benefit of the findings of these two reports, or of a third report requested by the President on the geenral subject of youth development and employment under the direction of the Secretary of Labor.

Hence the proposals of H.R. 3000 appear premature, even for those who advocate further Federal intervention into education. Centralized decisions to cure the ills of education certainly should not precede the diagnosis of the effects of previous Federal prescriptions. In any event, the national chamber does not believe that the Federal Government should or can effectively doctor American education in the indiscriminate fashion of H.R. 3000.

the national average. The 1962 rate among construction craftsmen other than carpenters averaged 8.8 percent, among carpenters 9.4 percent, and among construction laborers 20.4 percent. We need the school construction for its own sake, but the healthy effect in terms of employment is an added benefit which should not be overlooked.

The administration's plan further provides that Federal funds may be used to meet the special needs of children in slum schools, depressed areas, and migratory labor camps. Improving the educational opportunities for such deprived children is an urgent need.

One of the President's recommendations would indirectly be of great benefit to elementary and secondary schools, both public and private, and that is the provision of grants for the improvement of teacher training. The AFL-CIO, in testimony last year, noted the extent to which teachers of social studies are poorly prepared, few States requiring them to have taken even one formal course in college economics. Many union members have expressed dismay at the confused ideas about organized labor that their children develop in school. An important reason is that the teachers who are supposed to educate our young people about economic and social problems are ill-equipped to do so. The proposals advanced by the administration could do much to improve the teaching in America's schools.

In requesting a continuation of the existing program of aid to federally impacted areas, the administration has made one specific recommendation which we vigorously support, the inclusion for the first time of the District of Columbia.

Taken all together, these proposals would constitute an important step to ward a revitalized system of elementary and secondary education. But there is one respect in which the administration's program for elementary and seeondary schools needs to be strengthened. No American, whatever his religious beliefs, can fail to realize the extent to which nonpublic schools carry a large share of the burden of educating the young. These nonpublic schools face many of the same crises confronting the public schools. We believe that nonpublic elementary and secondary schools should receive as much assistance as is constitutionally possible.

Private nonprofit schools are presently eligible for National Defense Education Act loans to assist in procuring equipment for teaching science, mathematics, and foreign languages. The constitutionality of this program is by now well established. We urge a considerable expansion of this program. At the present time the NDEA loans are available only for equipment; we propose that they be made available also for the construction of classrooms to be used for the prescribed subjects. We also urge that the teaching of English and social studies be added to the present list of subjects for which NDEA loans are permitted.

Several of the President's proposals deal with problems of vocational education, a field of special concern to organized labor. They will be dealt with in a separate statement.

Three proposals advanced by the President have to do with adult education. One is to make Federal grants available to stimulate the establishment and the expansion of publicly supported programs of university extension education for adults. Union members have benefited greatly from the extension programs already underway and we have long supported expansion of present facilities A second proposal would provide funds for establishing basic education programs for adults who have completed less than 8 years of school. This is also a matter of close concern to organized labor, inasmuch as experience indicates that many workers are unable to benefit from job-retraining programs because they do not have enough basic education.

A third proposal would make grants available for the development of public libraries. The public library is one of the most useful sources of continuing education for most workers, but many communities have inadequate libraries and 18 million Americans have no library services available to them at all.

America has become a mobile nation. The poorly educated child of one State may grow up to become the unemployed worker of another. The entire Nation suffers when the educational facilities of any part of the Nation are inadequate. On the whole, American communities and States have made a great effort to meet their educational needs, but it has not been enough. When States and communities have unequal financial resources, equal educational opportunity is possible only through Federal action. The Federal Government alone has the taxing power needed to make equal opportunity a reality in elementary and secondary education, higher education, and adult education.

Whether Congress approaches the problems of education through such an omnibus bill as the administration has suggested, or whether it breaks the problem up into its several parts, President Kennedy, by suggesting the omnibus approach, has dramatized the extent to which these separate parts are in fact portions of a single whole. The foundations of education are laid in the elementary schools. The secondary schools build upon these foundations, preparing young people for future jobs and for further education. The colleges and universities prepare the teachers for those schools and they supply the advanced education which is an increasingly vital factor in all phases of American life. And adults who once thought of education as something for their children are discovering that they too need continuing education throughout their lives. Altogether, our educational needs add up to a tremendous challenge which must be met by such a major effort as President Kennedy has outlined in his message to Congress.

STATEMENT OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES

H.R. 3000 implements the panoramic view of the needs of education expressed in the President's message to the Congress on January 29, and assumes the necessity for and wisdom of Federal assistance in improving American education on all fronts. The several proposals of this bill further assume sufficient comprehension of the relative importance of each program proposed to warrant a wide variety of loans or grants made available on a variety of formula bases, with varying degrees of local and/or State effort required to activate the programs.

JUSTIFYING RESEARCH LACKING

The Chamber of Commerce of the United States believes the above assumptions to be unsound and finds little research evidence to justify Federal decisions of such far-reaching influence.

In fact, the Special Subcommittee on Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor last year requested a thorough evaluation of existing Federal programs in this field to determine what achievements and general influence on education these programs were having. At the same time, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare recognized the inadequate evaluation available on Federal programs in vocational education and set up a panel of consultants to review and evaluate such Federal programs.

The multitude of proposals in H.R. 3000 appear to have been made without the benefit of the findings of these two reports, or of a third report requested by the President on the geenral subject of youth development and employment under the direction of the Secretary of Labor.

Hence the proposals of H.R. 3000 appear premature, even for those who advocate further Federal intervention into education. Centralized decisions to cure the ills of education certainly should not precede the diagnosis of the effects of previous Federal prescriptions. In any event, the national chamber does not believe that the Federal Government should or can effectively doctor American education in the indiscriminate fashion of H.R. 3000.

FEDERAL VERSUS LOCAL-STATE DIRECTION

Instead, we believe that the responsibility for and the prerogative of evaluating the accomplishments and needs of our diverse State school systems should remain in the hands of State and local authorities. The decisions about the extent and the priority of needed changes in education can and should be made by these authorities with greater validity than through Federal agencies.

In contrast, H.R. 3000 proposes not only to maintain but to extend Federal decisionmaking about the course of American education into many new areas. The power of the Federal purse would require State and local and private agencies to adapt their views about the purpose and direction of their schools and colleges to the views projected by the Congress and enforced by the offer of Federal subsidies. Federal direction of the evolution in American education at all levels is inherent in the programs proposed in this legislation.

H.R. 3000 would establish 15 new Federal programs as well as extend and/or expand 10 existing programs now operating under the Vocational Education Acts and the National Defense Education Act. These 25, combined with recommended increases for National Science Foundation programs in education, would create new obligational authority in excess of $6 billion to be spent in the next 3 to 5 years (including phaseout of fellowship and loan programs).

Of this new obligational authority, $1.2 billion is requested in H.R. 3000 for fiscal year 1964. Of this amount, $831,930,000 would be allocated by formula to six new programs and the extension and expansion of five existing programs, as shown in table A attached. Table B reveals that four-fifths of this sum would merely be a return to each State of revenues collected from it.

Table B also reveals that the other one-fifth of the total would be collected from 14 States to be distributed among the other 36. However, 6 of these 36 States approximately break even in the redistribution; that is, receive only a few thousand dollars more than they would contribute.

A long series of Federal-aid proposals have been before the Congress since World War II, employing formulas assuming the need for redistribution of wealth. A review of these many proposals reveals the continuous decline in any justification that once might have existed for the Federal Government to make such a redistribution of wealth; and, conversely, it reveals that an increasing proportion of the funds proposed are not a matter of redistribution but purely one of return to the States of revenues collected from them.

The least wealthy region of the Nation, for example, in 1930, had per capita income only a little more than 50 percent as large as the Nation's average, and the most wealthy region almost 150 percent of the Nation's average. In contrast, the per capita income in the least wealthy region in 1960 was 75 percent of the Nation's average and that of the most wealthy region was only 118 percent of the Nation's average.

Thus, a natural equalization process is taking place in this country, making it less and less logical for the Federal Government to finance education on the thesis that the less wealthy States could not provide adequate school systems. This conclusion is further evident in the rising enrollment pressures which are most pronounced in States best able to increase school revenues. The Congress can best provide money in those communities experiencing rising school costs by leaving it there; that is, by lessening Federal taxation rather than increasing it. It would appear logical to permit higher income States to retain (or regain) control over the course of education (in their own State) for which they are and would be paying the total costs (as well as contributing to other States). Even if the Congress were to feel justified in compelling the 30 States receiving net aid to spend it in the several ways mandated by H.R. 3000, no such justification exists for compelling the higher income States to do so. Unquestionably, they have both the wealth and the leadership to run their own school systems.

The expansion of existing educational programs and initiation of 15 new Federal programs in education conflicts with the President's avowed intention to limit severely expenditures for fiscal year 1964 in order to make tax reductions feasible. While only $143.6 million of expenditures for these new programs are budgeted for fiscal year 1964 (see table C), this is but a fraction of the total cost of $1.215 billion authorized to be obligated in 1964. Expenditure programs such as these stand squarely in the path of needed tax cuts.