Mr. DODGE. I appreciate that. Thank you.

Senator SMITH of Maine. Senator Dirksen.

Senator DIRKSEN. Madam Chairman, I just wanted to make one observation to what my esteemed colleague from Chicago said.

One section relating to the special assistant recites there must be wide nongovernmental experience.

Now, inasmuch as the plan calls for confirmation by the Senate, certainly anybody who is appointed by the President would have to fit that criteria; and I am confident that the lawmakers of the Senate would take a good look at the qualifications and make sure that it would be somebody who has the background, who has the experience, who has the cooperative spirit, and who will do the job as intended by this Reorganization Act.

I also wanted to make one observation about the comment of my colleague from Minnesota, Mr. Humphrey, and perhaps I could put it in the form of a question-and I am just as much interested in the educational field as others; but if, for instance, you had a special assistant in the educational field, wouldn't it, in fact, of course, violate the very spirit of the Reorganization Act, which seeks to avoid duplication and overlapping, to bring about efficiency and economy?

I can readily understand, because of the nature of the Office of Education, that if you had a special assistant in addition to the Commissioner of Education, the chances are if there was the slightest divergence of viewpoint at all that you would run into real administrative difficulties; and, as you have so well pointed out, it is in an entirely different field because of the relationship that the States bear to the Federal Government and recognition that the States have for the primary and first concern that Federal Government should not intrude in that field, except in an advisory capacity and certainly not in a controllable capacity.

I think, therefore, if such a special assistant were set up it probably would do more harm than good and bring about a conflict of feeling and viewpoint.

I

Senator HUMPHREY. I think Senator Dirksen stated it well. don't like to bear down on the point, but I think it sticks out like a sore thumb.

Senator SMITH of Maine. Does the gentleman yield?

Senator HUMPHREY. I do.

Mr. DAWSON of Illinois. Isn't it true that the previous Federal Security Administrator was appointed by the President and had to have the okay of the Senate?

Senator DIRKSEN. That is true. I wanted to make the record clear because I think this is the time for candor. I expressed my anxiety about Mr. Oscar Ewing, one of the men who was there and later went to New York, as I look back and see the propaganda, as I observed the statements he made in all sections of the world, and when I say "world," I do it advisedly. I had a little suspicion as to whether he was trying to bring the end of a free society, so far as medicine is concerned. I think the country, in large measure, shared that view, and so when I made the observation a little while ago about the confidence that the country and the Congress had in the administrators, that is the place where you must stop.

-. You recall much of that propaganda was put out as the result of the expenditure of the Federal dollar.

Senator HUMPHREY. I don't think so, having labored through the days when the first so-called socialized-medicine bill was introduced. I still have a familiarity with that whole picture, and so I don't mind saying at all, that there was a real concern about the viewpoint of the administrators of social security. You don't believe all governmental doctrines are bad; do you?

Indeed not.

Senator HUMPHREY. The President had Government medical service for years as a distinguished officer of the armed services. I think the standards are as high today as with any private practitioner.

I recognize the views and the talents of surgical and medical people today, but Mr. Ewing was not a doctor. Mr. Ewing was giving direction to the affairs of doctors in Government. I think in terms of the cast of the mind of the civilian administrator. That is the important thing. May I say that I would be the last to reflect upon the unselfish service that has been accorded to the people and the Federal Government by unselfish medical people

Mr. POFF. What jurisdiction, if any, is granted here to the special assistant to the Secretary for Health and Medical Affairs over the medical service of the armed services?

Mr. DODGE. None that I am aware of, sir.

Mr. POFF. That is all.

Senator SMITH of Maine. Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts is unable to be present, and he has asked Mr. Marvin, his assistant, to sit here for him. He will not interrogate at this time, but I would like reference to show that he was present on behalf of Senator Kennedy.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I believe you testified that this special assistant does not stand between the Surgeon General and the Secretary in line of authority. Did you understand the question?

Mr. DODGE. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Just exactly where does he stand?

Mr. DODGE. The plan states very specifically that he has to give his advice to the Secretary in terms of the medical plans. I think it is well to view the fact that the medical services cut quite widely across everything in FSA. We have school health, for example, which involves the Office of Education, Public Health Service, and the Children's Bureau, the health and education of the child, maternal health, disability insurance, child care and juvenile dependency, all of which have various bureaus within the Federal Security Administration.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I recognize the widespread interest in health of all the departments of the Social Security, but I am somewhat at a loss to understand why this special assistant was appointed, apparently without any authority, and yet he is in the field, in the advisory field. He stands next to the Secretary. He is able, by his advice apparently, in an informal way, to overrule recommendations of the Surgeon General in regard to administrative functions, at least to nullify them-suggestions for new services or additional services, or change of service, which are within the scope of statutory law. At the present time, this man can, in effect, act as the veto on that.

I quote from Dr. Louis Bauer, of New York, president of the American Medical Association, in the Evening Star. He says

More than has ever been offered the medical profession before, is offered at the present time

He said

Everything that affects the medical profession must be screened through this assistant before it reaches the Secretary. He will have something to say about things in social security and education which have any health aspects whatever. Is that your concept of this man's prerogatives and jurisdiction? Mr. DODGE. That seems to be someone's version, I don't know whose. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Those are Dr. Bauer's words of the American Medical Association, and are apparently based on his understanding, or some type of conference or agreement with the Administration.

Mr. DODGE. If so, I don't know anything about it. I can point out this man is not in the line of authority and his advice would go to the Secretary, along with the advice of other Department heads. He does not under the terms of his position exercise any veto power.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I am glad to have that assurance. It is true that the Hoover Commission recommended all functions of the various subordinate agencies be vested in the Secretary as a matter of giving the Secretary his right to transfer functions from agency to agency within the Department, is it not?

Mr. DODGE. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. That power is not given the Secretary under this act?

Mr. DODGE. That is true.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. He has no power to transfer from agency to agency within his Department, those functions in those agencies?

Mr. DODGE. That is correct.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Where would she achieve any efficiency, if she is not permitted to reorganize and permit overlapping? How can she achieve any efficiency if she is prohibited in this plan from transferring or abrogating any function in these separate agencies?

Mr. DODGE. You can change functions under the present act. Senator HUMPHREY. Yes; you can change it from agency to agency. You can't abolish it, but you can change it.

Mr. DODGE. You can abolish it.

Senator HUMPHREY. You can abolish a statutory function in any of these agencies?

Mr. DODGE. That is right, if it is included in the plan, but there is nothing in this plan which is directed toward that, and if any such plan is to be introduced, you will have the same opportunity to study it that you have this one.

Senator HUMPHREY. I believe the witness is in error there. I do not believe the Secretary can abolish any of the functions now in the Department.

Mr. DODGE. You misunderstood me. The Secretary cannot. You could under a plan.

Senator HUMPHREY. We are talking about the plan now in force. She has no authority to abolish a function.

Mr. DODGE. She cannot, as I understand it, transfer from these set up by statute. She does have this advantage, she can consolidate the common-service functions of all departments, which is a step toward greater efficiency and reduced costs.

Senator SMITH of Maine. Will the gentleman yield?

Senator HUMPHREY. Yes.

Senator SMITH of Maine. I have asked about the reorganization record. For the record, may I say that as I understand it, you can

transfer functions from one agency to another. You cannot continue any agency or function beyond a period authorized by law. Neither can you abolish any existing executive departments.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Let us use the word "department" in the sense of this overall agency. Let us use the agencies in the sense of the component parts of the departments, Social Security, Education, and Health. If she cannot transfer functions and allowed overlapping functions in these three agencies within her department, her hands are tied. I believe that is the sense of the plan.

Senator SMITH of Maine. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes.

Mr. MILLER. In the proviso in section 7 of the bill it specifically provides that no professional or substantive function vested by law in any office shall be removed from the jurisdiction of such officer under this section. That is consistent with the basic organic act of the reorganization plan, but it does not prevent the new department head from eliminating duplicating services and functions that were not set up by statute.

Mr. DODGE. That is correct.

Mr. MILLER. And there is certainly more duplication in the general services and functions within the department than have been created by statute. You can create a great deal of efficiency without abolishing statutory functions.

Mr. DODGE. That is correct.

Senator HUMPHREY. We trust the Secretary can do that. It seems to me the plan would be useless-there was some discussion a few minutes ago about the fact that the hands of the new Secretary are tied in regard to the elimination of personnel under the merit system under civil service. It seems to me it would be very simple to overcome that by having the administration set up suggested legislation to scuttle the merit system as it now is under civil service. We can scuttle that and take away the benefits that these men have gained through their years of service. I assume we can expect such legislation.

Mr. DODGE. No; I will assume, and I think rightly, that you cannot expect legislation that will scuttle the civil service.

Senator HUMPHREY. I am glad to have that assurance. That is not contemplated. That is all.

A point of information for the record. Will that special assistant on health have supervision over the Federal Food and Drug Administration?

Mr. DODGE. I think that can best be answered by the statement that under terms of the appointment, he does not have direct supervision over anything.

Senator HUMPHREY. Would he have advisory functions over Food and Drug?

Mr. DODGE. That I don't know.

Senator HUMPHREY. Are there any plans underway to remove the office of Commissioner of Food and Drug from civil service? Mr. DODGE. Not that I know of.

Senator DIRKSEN. In the interest of clarity, insofar as it pertains to health, it would seem to me that the special assistant in an advisory capacity, should be able to advise the Secretary of his Department

30934-53-3

where that question arises. As a matter of fact, I think it would be a very desirable function.

Senator HUMPHREY. You are saying, if it is interpreted that the food and drug law pertains to the general health of the population, the special assistant on health and medical services would have some advisory functions in this area?

Senator DIRKSEN. I think so.

Senator HUMPHREY. I believe a closer delineation of the responsibility of the special assistant on health would be very desirable here, because the food and drug law does not only pertain to medical services, but it pertains to such things as grain inspection and the Agricultural Committee in the Senate. We have been holding hearings as to food and drug inspectors and their work in western elevators. With all my great respect for the medical profession, I didn't know they were qualified in the field of grain inspection, and I don't want to see a special assistant in the field of health and medical services exercising advisory functions in the field of food and drug law which is wide and comprehensive, unless the person is especially qualified in that particular area. I do believe it is important to the legislative history of this reorganization act that the Bureau of the Budget or the new department head tell us just exactly what this special assistant is going to do.

Senator DIRKSEN. May I make one observation. Let us consider the use of poisonous sprays in the orchards of the country. There has always been a sharp difference of opinion as to the tolerances that the Food and Drug Administration allows, and as a matter of fact, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Representative Cannon, in the days when I was on the Subcommittee on Agriculture in the House of Representatives carried on that controversy constantly. I know nobody who would be so expert in that field who had basic medical knowledge as to what the tolerances should be, so there is a so-called health program, where you want one who had wide experience in that field, at least to give it the benefit of his experience and information to the department head in every case where that question may arise.

Senator HUMPHREY. I don't want to split hairs on the responsibility of this particular individual; however, if Congressman Holifield's interpretation is to be accepted that this special assistant would screen information that was to come to the Secretary of the new department, I think that would be a very unfortunate situation in this instance, because the food and drug and cosmetic law goes far beyond what is the normal training or specialized training of an extraordinarily competent medical officer. You get into the problem of intricate chemistry, and I don't think the average or most competent doctor would want to set himself up as an adviser in all fields. I think we ought to raise the question, so it does bring further interpretation. I intend to support the plan, but I don't think we should go off the deep end by leaving it hanging in the air. The responsibilities of the special assistant, when you have such a complex and all-embracing law as you have in this Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, should be subject to careful review.

Senator DIRKSEN. Obviously in a plan of this kind, you have got to use broad general language, and I think the language in the plan it