Whereas for over a hundred years, from 1798 until 1900, the Congress, appropriated annual funds for the support of schools for Indians under religious auspices, without constitutional protest or condemnation; and

Whereas the Powell bill itself provides certain general assistance to higher education without difference or discrimination by reason of religious or nonreligious affiliation in the true spirit of the first amendment; and

Whereas funds for the assistance of elementary education, if any, will be raised by taxation of all, without regard to religious or nonreligious affiliation, and such funds should be applied and expended without discrimination by reason of the religious or nonreligious affiliation of legally constituted and acceptable elementary and secondary schools; now, therefore, be it hereby

Resolved, That the Powell bill, now before Congress, proposing to grant Federal assistance only to elementary and secondary education conducted by the State and municipal governments and only to children and adolescents educated by State and municipal governments by the use of Federal taxes collected from all citizens, is unjust and unconstitutional with respect to children who exercise their constitutional right to avail themselves of nongovernmental educational facilities.

Such bill discriminates especially against the millions of such parents and children who avail themselves of elementary and secondary education under religious auspices, which fulfills all governmental educational requirements. The Powell bill proposes aid to education, and, by its terms, unjustly excludes from such aid approximately 1 out of every 7 children in the United States. Nevertheless, this bill taxes the parents of all these children for the funds to grant this aid in which they cannot share.

This is unjust, as it would be clearly unjust to grant tax relief to all taxpayers over 65, who reside in governmental institutions for the aged, and withhold such relief from aged taxpayers who reside in religiously conducted institutions for the aged. Taxation without representation is tyranny, and taxation without equal and nondiscriminatory sharing of the benefits therefrom is flagrant injustice.

The Powell bill is unconstitutional because it applies a criterion of religious affiliation to determine the students in elementary and secondary education who may benefit thereunder and those who may not, which the same bill does not do in higher education. Under this bill, the performance of an act motivated by religion, i.e., attendance at a legally acceptable elementary or secondary school under religious auspices, determines whether the student shall or shall not benefit from Federal aid.

Thus the Powell bill violates both the spirit and the letter of the first amendment to our Constitution, since it would interfere with the true exercise of religion by setting up a religious test of eligibility for elementary or secondary educational aid.

It is further

Resolved, That the New York Archdiocesan Union of the Holy Name Societies go on record as opposing the Federal aid to elementary and secondary education proposed by the Powell bill, and that a copy of this resolution be mailed to both Senators from New York and to each Member of the House of Representatives from a district within the counties of New York, Bronx, Richmond, Dutchess. Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester of the State of New York.

Hon. ADAM C. POWELL,

House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

SAN ANGELO, TEX., February 28, 1962.

DEAR MR. POWELL: I am a student at San Angelo Central High School. Being a member of the senior class, I am taking Government for a credit toward graduation. Our class is required to trace a bill through its steps through Congress. I have selected the bill H.R. 2999, which you introduced, because it interested me more than the other several hundred bills which I read. This bill is especially important here in San Angelo. I have seen several experiences of the turning down of a job because of his color. I can assure you that if your bill passes. there will be more opportunities for jobs everywhere.

I have already written my Congressman and wish your opinion on the bill. Any pamphlets and information pertaining to this bill will be welcomed with your respectful reply.

Yours sincerely,

(Miss) ELIZABETH ROBLES.

STATEMENT OF 1963 WISCONSIN COUNCIL OF CITIZENS FOR EDUCATIONAL FREEDOM

The Wisconsin Council of Citizens for Educational Freedom represents over 400,000 Wisconsin independent school parents and claims a fair share of every tax-provided education dollar for each independent school child, because money spent to aid the education of the independent school child is not expended for a private purpose. Education is a public purpose, a public need, a public benefit, and a public obligation.

Any education aid legislation which the 88th Congress may consider for the common good must insure equal treatment under the laws for all school children, must insure a real freedom of choice in education without a penalty. Citizens for Educational Freedom maintains that there are no clear constitutional prohibitions against aid to the independent school child. The first amendment bans against an establishment of religion, not against aid to citizens who happen to be religious. The U.S. Supreme Court in the Pierce, Cochran, and Everson decisions, clearly endorses the child-benefit maxim and sanctions direct aid to the independent school child.

Legislation to develop the national excellence and to encourage maximum development of every young American capacity must include each of the 7 million independent school children. Political realities and sagacity require grants-inaid to the independent school child. The only barriers are a tradition which has been recognized as invalid by leading constitutional experts and honest misunderstandings which we believe will dissolve upon a fair review.

The Wisconsin Council of Citizens for Educational Freedom, whose members and friends are adherents of Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish faiths, therefore, asks the 88th Congress of the United States to pass education aid legislation only if independent school children are included; only if the civil rights of tens of millions of Americans are affirmed; and only if equal benefits for all American youth are assured.

WARREN B. O'CONNOR, President.

THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN,
Madison, Wis., March 25, 1963.

Hon. ADAM C. POWELL,
House of Representatives,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SIR: I am unable to attend hearings in connection with H.R. 3001, National Education Improvement Act of 1963. I strongly support its many provisions and believe that our national defense, as well as our human resources, will be greatly enhanced by :

Improving educational quality through continuation and expansion of NDEA.

Substantially increasing the scope of the cooperative research program. Expanding, modernizing, and rebuilding physical facilities in higher education in accordance with anticipated needs.

Improving the curriculum and the preparation of professional personnel for such basic fields as English, history, geography, technical education, foreign languages not now emphasized, and the creative arts, whose study can contribute to developing the type of creativity needed in today's scientific age.

The University of Wisconsin and the State of Wisconsin are participating in many provisions of the National Defense Education Act of 1958. I am personally directing a research project under provisions of the cooperative research program, and completed one in 1959. These various educational programs of the Federal Government contribute directly to the improvement of education and indirectly to the expansion of democratic principles and ideals. I fully believe that providing better education to young people is our first line of defense against unemployment, delinquency, crime, and foreign ideologies. Many of our localities and States do not have the financial resources to provide quality education.

Yours sincerely,

HERBERT J. KLAUSMEIER, Professor, Educational Psychology.

STATEMENT BY WILMER V. BELL, DIRECTOR OF ADULT EDUCATION, BALTIMORE CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Mr. Chairman and members of the committees, as director of adult education of Baltimore, one of our Nation's largest and most complex cities and the city with the longest history of public school adult education, I am impelled, as a matter of public duty as well as professional conviction, to offer the following testimony in support of H.R. 3000, title VI, part B-Adult Basic Education. Section 621 sets forth, in general terms, the purposes of the part of the bill, but does not, and possibly should not, suggest the urgency of the proposed legislation and allotments of funds. On the other hand, those of us who deal, daily, with the hazardous effects of adult undereducation, particularly as they come to focus in the growing populations of our large cities, can and do sense the overwhelming and immediate necessity to find the means to help our adult citizens to exercise, more adequately, their public and private responsibilities, and to achieve economic and social independence.

From a national viewpoint, we see these seriously undereducated adults as constituting a brake upon the ability of this Nation to meet its internal and international responsibilities quickly and resourcefully.

(1) As workers, the undereducated adult is less and less able to meet the rising levels of skill demanded by our improving technology. They are inevitably the last hired, the first fired, and the perennial consumers of our welfare budgets. They lack the basic educational means to take advantage of vocational retraining programs, and become an increasingly larger and harder core of chronically unemployed.

(2) They are less and less able to provide the parental guidance their children need in the face of the growing complexities of modern urban life and, under these circumstances, their lack of education diminishes the stability and the beneficial influences of our Nation's families, whose vigor undergirds our national virtue.

(3) They are less resourceful in using, wisely, the increasing hours of leisure which improved technology and increasing longevity are providing.

(4) They are readily exploited by those who prey upon the ignorant and the gullible. They find it difficult to protect themselves, their families, and their communities from irresponsible or malicious propaganda.

(5) They provide a weak and shifting element in the foundation of citizen understanding upon which our national leaders depend for support in the complex decisions of the day.

In Maryland, of which, as a native, I am justly proud, the 1960 census reveals that 129,793 adults over 25 years of age, 7 percent of the age group. have less than 5 years of schooling; 460,511, over 27 percent, never finished elementary school; only 292,486 finished high school; 23,915 have no recollection of ever attending any school. Current studies suggest that the actual level of reading, writing, and arithmetical achievement of these groups is lower than what the census data implies.

In recent years, despite this evident need, Maryland has found it possible to appropriate only $75,000 for adult education purposes, and this has been earmarked largely for vocational courses rather than for basic education.

Maryland has approximately 229,000 unskilled and semiskilled workers. of which about 60,000 are currently unemployed. It has 72,448 welfare recipients, many of whom are functionally illiterate. These facts we see as related to adult education in two ways: Education is needed to prevent, and education is needed to alleviate, these and similar kinds of social insufficiency. In Baltimore, the educational level is lower-a median for the adult population of 8.9 years of school completed for the city versus 10.4 years for the State. This means that more than half of the adult residents of Baltimore never finished junior high school.

Moreover, in Baltimore, 3 percent (16,603) adults 25 years of age and over have never been to school; 14 percent (76,599) have had less than 5 years of school; 39 percent (210,265) never entered junior high school.

This is the group for which the need of this legislation is particularly significant.

Baltimore has had an adult education program for over 120 years, but the resources made available by the city do not currently match the growing intensity of need. Consequently, less than 20,000 are now enrolled in adult education classes, even though the recently imposed fee is only $4 or less per semester. Even this modest fee, established in 1961, by reason of municipal

financial strictures, caused drastic reductions in enrollment, particularly among the less well educated and the less economically self-sufficient groups.

It does not surprise us, then, to note that the intensity of social deficiencies in Baltimore is greater than for Maryland as a total unit. For instance, the infant mortality rate is 32.5 per 1,000 live births versus 27.4 for the State, and the public welfare recipient rate is more than twice as great (4.8/2.3).

While lack of education is not the only reason for economic and social inadequacy, incontestably, it plays a major role. It seems significant, in this connection, to notice that of the 1,600 current inmates of the Maryland State Penitentiary, 65 percent never completed the eighth grade; only 35 percent entered high school, but only 10 percent graduated.

Similar figures to those reported here for Maryland and Baltimore may be found in all our States. Each State differs, though, in recognition of the significance of such data and in willingness to meet the demonstrated need through appropriate legislation and budget allocations. But this is no longer merely a local or State problem; adult educational inadequacy is, in fact, an insistent national problem. The growing mobility of the people of our Nation brings the undereducated from one locality quickly to another. One problem of our great cities is the growing numbers and concentrations of educationally deprived persons who have migrated from less-favored areas. Moreover, decisions and behavior of individuals and groups in one locality have immediate repercussions throughout the country and even the world.

Adult education offers unique potentialities for this era with its demand for rapid and complete mobilization of human mental resources. The decisions which are being made now and in the next few months and years will be crucial to the survival of our world. The ultimate voice in making these decisions in this democracy is that of today's adult. We cannot wait for today's children to be trained to handle tomorrow's problems. It is scarcely better, in this age of accelerating change, to find today's adults trying to handle today's problems with yesterday's knowledge. If we are to have the informed electorate which it is axiomatic to state, is necessary for our successful functioning in a democratic society, we must utilize every available means to train today's citizens for today's needs and hopefully for those of tomorrow. We must continue to educate the people who are already exercising active influence as workers, employers, parents, voters, and taxpayers, to understand and deal intelligently with the fluid but crucial issues of our time.

Emphasis needs to be given to the fact that the education of adults is as vital to a society as the education of its children, and the effects are more immediately felt. Moreover, the benefits derived by the State are no less significant than are those derived by the person participating.

The effects of ignorance are not less dangerous than those of physical disease, against which we have set elaborate quarantine systems. The symptoms of ignorance are harder to detect, but no less malicious. The only effective treatment is a great extension of preventive measures, toward which the provisions of H.R. 3000, title VI, part B promise to make an important contribution.

Public funds used for this purpose may well be offset many times over, not only by increasing productivity in our national business and industry, but also by reducing the drain upon our resources for alleviation of social needs, which increased education can prevent.

NASSON COLLEGE, Springvale, Maine, February 6, 1963.

Hon. ADAM CLAYTON POWELL,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR REPRESENTATIVE POWELL: With the presentation of the administration's educational program, we see, already, the possibility that our young people may again be the losers as various special interest groups attempt to use the education program as a grounds for political horse trading. There are many of us who are deeply concerned that this not happen again. Perhaps these thoughts may be of some small help to you in your efforts to strengthen our total educational endeavor.

Last year, when the compromise bill was shelved, I was moved to look into the actions taken by Mrs. Jenkins of the PTA and William G. Carr of the National Education Association, especially since I have been associated with both organizations over the years. I could find no PTA officer, up to our State president,

who had been consulted prior to Mrs. Jenkins' action. I am a member of the NEA and no one, up to and including our State executive, knew anything about Mr. Carr's action. In fact, the Association for Higher Education of the NEA had endorsed the President's program, and has repudiated Mr. Carr's action. Unquestionably, there will be much heated discussion of the proposed legislation this year, too. One of the arguments certain to be raised is that of church and state, and the first amendment.

In the first place, it is evident to students of our language familiar with late 18th century American usage, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion ***" meant that Congress was specifically barred from establishing an official or State religion, and nothing more.

In support of this contention I would submit George Washington's recommendations to the Congress on January 8, 1790. To save your staff's reasearch time, I enclose a memorandum to our faculty in which the pertinent sections of the speech are quoted.

The seminaries, or colleges and universities as they are now known, to which President Washington referred were church-controlled, or church-related, colleges then, and included even Georgetown, which was founded the year before the message. Nowhere can I find that anyone claimed Washington's proposal violated either the letter or spirit of the first amendment to the Constitution. I have had this checked by our history staff, including a specialist in the Federalist period, and I am assured that it would probably be well known if such an argument had been raised.

But then, this is not surprising. President Washington was a stanch defender of the Constitution, a man of highest political morality. He knew the men who wrote the Constitution, what they wrote, why they wrote it, and what they meant. He would not knowingly have recommended action which was not compatible with the supreme law of our Nation.

President Kennedy's proposals most certainly cannot fairly be attacked on these grounds particularly when the future of our young people is at stake. I know that I speak for many who are deeply concerned that we continue to develop further the educational opportunities essential to a strong democratic nation when I say that we hope this Congress will do the job which only it can do.

We often hear that the Federal Government has no business being concerned with aid to education, and that such participation is simply another form of creeping socialism.

The following comments about the importance of institutions of learning are excerpted from the first annual address of President George Washington, delivered to the Senate and House of Representatives on January 8, 1790. The importance which Washington gave to these ideas is underlined by the fact that this excerpt comprised 20 percent of the address, a message in which he was establishing priorities of congressional concern for national issues.

"Nor am I less persuaded that you will agree with me in opinion that there is nothing which can better deserve your patronage than the promotion of science and literature. Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis of public happiness. In one in which the measures of government receive their impressions so immediately from the sense of the community as in ours it is proportionably essential. To the security of a free constitution it contributes in various ways-by convincing those who are entrusted with the public administration that every valuable end of government is best answered by the enlightened confidence of the people, and by teaching the people themselves to know and to value their own rights; to discern and provide against invasions of them; to distinguish between oppression and the necessary exercise of lawful authority; between burdens proceeding from a disregard to their convenience and those resulting from the inevitable exigencies of society; to discriminate the spirit of liberty from that of licentiousness-cherishing the first, avoiding the last-and uniting a speedy but temperate vigilance against encroachments, with an inviolable respect to the laws.