of Surgeon General, Commissioner of Education, and the Commissioner of Social Security. These professional representatives in each field will have direct access to the head of the Department, who will have representation in the President's Cabinet. Today these vitally important fields have no such representation. Cabinet status would provide close and frequent contacts with the President and with other Cabinet officials and would make it possible for a representative presenting the point of view of health, education, and security to bring to the attention of the major executive departments of government plans regarding these problems so vital to them. Several organizations may speak out in criticism of the plan because it does not give full Cabinet status to the separate agencies of health, education, and security. The plan itself does not preclude their growth to separate Cabinet rank. Development of the American free economy may eventually warrant such separate departments. Perhaps the most effective compromise in the plan is the elimination of any move to bring in the health services of the Veterans' Administration and the Military Establishment. With this compromise it should be feasible to move forward rapidly and effectively to the achievement of the creation of a department with Cabinet rank which has long been the dream of people in the fields of education, health, and welfare. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. That concludes the witnesses for this afternoon, but if there are others present who desire to testify we can have them at this time. We can hear Mrs. Fahy, from the American Parents Committee. STATEMENT OF MRS. JACK B. FAHY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE AMERICAN PARENTS COMMITTEE, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mrs. FAHY. I am Mrs. Jack B. Fahy, executive director of the American Parents Committee. Three years ago this committee was organized as a national organization to work for better conditions for children. Our chairman is Mr. George J. Hecht, publisher of Parents' Magazine and several other publications dealing with children. May I submit to the committee our list of officers and directors? (The list is as follows:) THE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE AMERICAN PARENTS COMMITTEE, INC. Chairman OFFICERS George J. Hecht, president of Parents' Institute, Inc. (publishers of Parents' Magazine and School Management); founder and secretary for 20 years of the Welfare Couucil of New York City; vice president, Social Legislation Information Service. Vice Chairmen Mrs. Dorothy Canfield Fisher, novelist and educational authority, Arlington, Vt. Walt Disney, motion-picture producer, Hollywood, Calif. Robert L. Johnson, president, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa.; chairman, Citizens Committee on the Hoover Report. Treasurer Harold A. Rich, vice president, Chase National Bank, New York City. Secretary Melvyn Gorden Lowenstein, attorney, New York City. Executive director Mrs. Jack B. Fahy, executive director, American Parents Committee. BOARD OF DIRECTORS David Baird, vice president of Marsh & McLennan, real-estate firm; president of the Baird Foundation and the Lansing Foundation. George V. Denny, Jr., president, Town Hall, Inc., New York; moderator, Town Meeting of the Air. Dr. Hildegard Durfee, child psychologist; former supervisor of WPA Rhode Island nursery schools. Maximillian Elser, president, Elser & Cothran, public-relations firm. Arthur C. Fatt, executive vice president, Grey Advertising Agency, New York. Dr. Benjamin Fine, education editor of the New York Times. Max Grant, president of Money Meters, Inc., Providence, R. I.; active in philanthropic work. Carl A. Gray, president of the Grenby Manufacturing Co., Plainville, Conn.; member of Community Citizens Committee on Education. Shelby M. Harrison, former general director of the Russell Sage Foundation; executive committee, National Social Welfare Assembly; board member, Child Welfare League of America. Mrs. George J. Hecht, board member, New York Society for Crippled Children; education division, Manhattan section of Girl Scouts. Lowell Iberg, associate general director of the State Charities Aid Association, New York City. Dr. Mary Fisher Langmuir, president of the Child Study Association of America; head of the department of child study, Vassar College. Alden Lilly white, vice chairman, Arlington, Va., Citizens Committee on Public Schools. Mrs. Clara Savage Littledale, editor, Parents' magazine. Mrs. Oswald B. Lord, board member of Community Chests and Council, Inc.; former chairman, women's division, National War Fund. Dr. Alfred Marrow, president, Harwood Manufacturing Co., New York. George W. Naumburg, chairman of the finance committee, Federation of Jewish Mrs. Dorothy Norman, columnist, New York Post. Dr. John K. Norton, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia University; chairman of the committee of relations with government, American Council of Education. Basil O'Connor, president of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis; former president of American Red Cross. Col. Harold Riegelman, partner of Nordinger, Riegelman & Benetar, law firm. Oscar V. Rose, superintendent of schools of Midwest City, Okla., and unofficial chairman of about 400 school superintendents in areas where Federal Government owns a large part of taxable land. Mrs. Sam Rosenman, former chairman of National Housing Conference. Mrs. Reeve Schley, member of the executive committee of the Republican National Committee. Dr. Robert Sears, director, Laboratory of Human Development, Harvard University. Dr. George N. Shuster, president of Hunter College, New York. Prof. L. Joseph Stone, department of child study, Vassar College. Mrs. De Forest Van Slyck, former executive of the National Association of Junior Leagues. Mrs. Arthur White, member, Board of Mental Hygiene, New Jersey. Mrs. Gertrude Folks Zimand, general secretary of the National Child Labor Committee. Dr. Roma Gans, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia University. Mrs. Joseph Willen, chairman, legislative committee of the National Council of Jewish Women. Mrs. FAHY. I am testifying before your committee as a partisan of the children of America the 46,000,000 future doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs of our country. Under the auspices of the Federal Security Agency, the Children's Bureau, Office of Education, Social Security Board, and the United States Public Health Service administer many of the needs of children. To give them eminence that is, Cabinet status-to the Federal Security Agency at once gives eminence and stature to the children of the United States. Believing that our future citizenry deserve a voice in their Government, I wish to speak in behalf of Reorganization Plan No. 27. Adoption of this plan entails establishing a three-division Department of Health, Education, and Security, giving immediately more importance to the functions of each division. The Surgeon General, Commissioner of Education, and the Commissioner of Social Security will be professionally qualified-the best in the field. These men will be responsible in the main for shaping the policy for the better welfare of our people. With such positions of trust, I think it is important to realize that in this reorganization plan these men for the first time will be subject to the consideration and approval of the Senate. They will be truly representative of the people whose wellbeing they formulate and compound. Further, I think it is extremely important that the Divisions of Health, Education, and Social Security gain the eminence and the voice provided by Reorganization Plan No. 27. These Divisions will have as head of their Department a Secretary who will coordinate administratively their functions, who will know their needs and will guide administratively their operations. The Secretary, in turn, when granted Cabinet status, will know the needs of the country, will participate in the over-all planning of the country, and will be better able to operate his Department in accordance with those plans. Consider the Department of Defense: Congress deals with this Secretary, knowing that his Department combines the talents of the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force-professionally qualified experts who implement each phase of the defense problem. Is it not a logical parallel, then, to make available to Congress a Department combining the talents of specialists who implement each phase of the social problem? I believe that the Federal Security Agency at this point lacks nothing but the title of "Department" and a place in the Cabinet to give the Agency and its three divisions much-needed authority. The organization itself is established, an administrative keystone of American well-being, disbursing approximately $2,000,000,000 annually for the protection of our greatest natural resource, the people. Each person in this country is benefited in some way by the Federal Security Agency. The United States Public Health Service is now, or soon will be, we hope, in every needful area in the United States. At the present time approximately 35,000,000 persons have socialsecurity numbers, and about 29,000,000 children are attending schools in the United States. I can see no valid reason for withholding Cabinet status from this Agency. The American Parents Committee sincerely believes that this reorganization plan is feasible and would impart greater cognizance to the needs and the means of alleviating the needs of the people. We believe Reorganization Plan No. 27 should be approved in the interests of economy, efficiency, and in the interests of the future citizens soon to learn the word "democracy." The CHAIRMAN. There is one statement I would like for you to amplify, if you will, please. On page 2 of your prepared statement you say, "I believe that the Federal Security Agency at this point lacks nothing but the title of 'Department.' Mrs. FAHY. And I interposed "and a voice in the Cabinet." The CHAIRMAN. "To give the Agency and its three divisions muchneeded authority." Will you tell us what additional authority this will confer? Mrs. FAHY. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Security would have administrative powers to run the agency more efficiently, to coordinate budgets, to coordinate publicity, and other functions which he does not now have. The CHAIRMAN. Do you realize that that is one of the fears that justifies some opposition or is used as opposition to this plan, that very fact, that it would give him opportunity to employ more forcible publicity in what some call propaganda for a socialized medicine program? Do you have that in mind, too? Mrs. FAHY. No, I do not, sir. My organization does not recommend health insurance at this time. The CHAIRMAN. You mentioned that, and I asked you what you meant by "needed authority." I just pointed out that that is what we are hearing as an objection to it. Mrs. FAHY. I think that any organization now or agency that handles as much money and deals with so many people is entitled to a Cabinet position and needs the administrative powers that would benefit them. The CHAIRMAN. You would not object, then, to separate departments for each of the functions, would you? Mrs. FAHY. Senator, my organization is not on record as to separate organizations. I believe in Reorganization Plan No. 27. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Thank you very much. Mrs. FAHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other witnesses who wish to testify? STATEMENT OF EDGAR FULLER, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS Mr. FULLER. I am privileged to appear here as spokesman for the National Council of Chief State School Officers. The members of the council are the State superintendents and commissioners of education of each of the 48 States and the island dependencies and Territories. They are responsible to the Office of Education and to other branches of the Federal Government for the administration of programs of Federal aid to education in the States, such as the distribution of surplus property to schools and colleges, the school lunch, vocational rehabilitation, vocational education, approval of on-the-job training establishments for veterans and others. Because Dr. Worth McClure, executive secretary of the American Association of School Administrators, is not able to be here, I have also been authorized in writing to speak directly for that great association of 7,532 local superintendents of schools. I might say, Mr. Chairman, I left St. Louis last night where the NEA convention is being held and Dr. McClure is detained there. Later in my testimony I shall also refer to resolutions passed by various great organizations of edu cators and laymen which favor arrangements for the education agency of the Federal Government different from those proposed by Reorganization Plan No. 27. It is my function here today, Mr. Chairman, to emphasize to you this position of the Chief State School Officers and the American Association of School Administrators, and to give the reasons for that position. Almost no one is satisfied with the United States Office of Education as it is. The literature on the subject is filled with expressions of disappointment at the organization of education in the Federal Government. For a time previous to 1939 the Office of Education was a Bureau in the United States Department of Interior. In that Department, it was better off than it would be in a Department of Health, Education, and Security as proposed by plan 27, but its situation was still far from satisfactory. The removal of the Office of Education to the Federal Security Agency in 1939, on the theory that close association with health and welfare agencies would be helpful, has not helped at all. The necessary cooperation of the Office of Education with these agencies obviously does not require integration with them or control by them; on the contrary, the small education agency needs freedom from the domination of the huge welfare agencies to be heard at all. So long as the Office of Education is held in what Dr. McClure has called political peonage it will not be able to do the work for education it should do. Senator IVES. May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman? I have a question along the line of a question I directed this morning to Mr. Lawton. Mr. FULLER. I heard that. Senator IVES. Were you there? Were you going to comment on that? You seemed to be doing it. Go ahead with your statement. Mr. FULLER. I am going to cover it. Education cuts across every concern and every agency of the Federal Government; it is concerned more with the preparation of young people for national defense, for instance, than with the social security that seeks to absorb its voice in the Federal Government. According to the reasoning that the Office of Education must be in the agency where other divisions have educational impacts, it should be in the Department of Agriculture, where the school-lunch program is by far the largest Federal aid to elementary and secondary education, and where the Extension Service activities are. Compared with these, social security has little to do with education. Health services are related, it is true, but representatives of both health and education believe these agencies can cooperate better if they are independent services not dominated by social welfare. There are some who say the voice of education would be stronger if the Federal Security Administrator became Secretary of a Department. We do not know whether this would be true. The Administrator is already welcome at the White House. I have heard it said he has a key to each door. And he speaks for education all over the country. But whether his voice would be stronger in the Cabinet is immaterial because the value to education depends fundamentally on who speaks rather than on the volume. Education is a unique and nonpartisan function of government. It is a State function and not a Federal function, as the Director of |