ever those powers are, I would be able to exercise them under this new plan. But there is no power to do the things that you are talking about.

Senator IVES. You mean that the Chief Administrator would not have the power to institute programs of informal education?

Mr. EWING. No.

Senator IVES. Via the Assistant Commissioner of Education?
Mr. EWING. No, sir.

Senator IVES. Then subsection (2) does not mean anything.
Mr. EWING. You are talking of "programing."

Senator Ives. It is not just programing, it is not just regulation; it is policy, too.

Senator HUMPHREY. May I ask this question, please?

Would it not be possible for the Commissioner of Education, who is responsible to no one at the present time, to go off on some sort of wild chase?

Senator IVES. That is right.

Senator HUMPHREY. It seems to me, Senator, that the situation today is: Who puts the brakes on the Commissioner of Education? No

one.

Senator IVES. You are absolutely correct, Senator; but the point we are driving at is this fear largely on the part of the medical profession that if this change were to be made, there would be a new vehicle created automatically by which the Administrator, Mr. Ewing, because of his personal interest in a certain program, would be able more effectively to present that program and to create support for it than can be done at the present time.

Senator HUMPHREY. It is my considered judgment that what the real issue is, Senator, is a personality issue.

Senator IVES. I am not arguing about the plan, I am talking about the authority.

Senator HUMPHREY. In other words, what has happened in America is that a group of people who are well organized, because of a particular program which has been advanced by the President's Federal Security Administrator, have taken out their fury upon a Reorganization Plan, simply because they do not like a particular program-and an imaginary program-which has just as much chance of passing this Congress as I have to climbing to the moon without the aid of the Canadian Rocket.

Senator IVES. I think that is partly responsible for it. I do not think that is the only reason responsible for the opposition.

Senator HUMPHREY. I may say that I have 500 telegrams in my office, which I intend to bring to the committee-for the purpose of getting some of them answered-and every one of them states at the bottom of the telegram that the reason for the opposition is that they do not like Mr. Ewing's program. They are all alike. What they really get down to is that they do not like Mr. Ewing's program.

Now, we are not talking about the gentleman's program. What we are talking about is functional organization and administrative organization, and I will say that there is nothing-and I read this over again and again, and have talked it over with many people-in this plan, that permits the Secretary of Welfare to promulgate any new program. All he can do is to realine and readjust existing programs, and existing policies.

Senator IVES. Senator, you say he cannot promulgate a new program, or any program. Then what does the grant of authority mean if it does not authorize him, through the exercise of his control of his Department to institute policies and programs that he might desire?

Senator HUMPHREY. You institute administrative policies and you realine functions. It is the same argument, may I say, that every governor has had, that every municipal official has had; that is, you have a chief of police, with a separate detective bureau, a separate women's bureau, a separate police inspector-all separate entities— and then you hold the chief of police responsible.

Senator Ives. And the chief of police does what you tell him.
Senator HUMPHREY. He does not make any new laws.
Senator IVES. He cannot make any new laws.
required in this instance.

No new laws are

Ι

Senator HUMPHREY. Senator, we could argue that a long time. Senator ROBERTSON. Mr. Chairman, may I ask one question? The CHAIRMAN. Yes, Senator Robertson; but may I say this first? I had hoped that we could conclude the testimony in time for the committee, at least, to have a little executive session, and a general discussion of our procedure.

All right, Senator Robertson.

Senator ROBERTSON. Would it be a fair analysis of the national health plan to say that no power that a Secretary of Welfare would have, or could try to assume, would exceed the power that is definitely conferred upon the Social Security Administrator in the pending bill?

Mr. EWING. I would say that that is absolutely true if you include the present Federal Security Administrator and the people under him, because there are certain independent powers. It adds no new independent power to those that exist, either in the Administrator or in the bureau chiefs.

Senator ROBERTSON. As I read that bill, I could not see where any power was left out of the Administrator. It seems to me that he was to be the top official and have the final say-so on everything to be done under him.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? If not, do you wish to make any further statement, Mr. Ewing?

Mr. EwING. Yes.

The point was raised that the new Department would be dominated by the welfare idea.

As I explained here the other day, the name "Department of Welfare" was adopted rather than the "Department of Health, Education, and Security," because if you adopt the name of "Department of Health, Education, and Security" it would look as though you were freezing the health activities in there; whereas we meant to leave it fluid. The name "Department of Welfare" was used merely in the general sense of including health and education and everything else.

With respect to the idea that the Public Health Service would be hurt, I just want to say what has happened in the past.

In the 10 years that the Public Health Service has been in the Federal Security Agency, its appropriations have been increased by 517

percent and the Social Security Administration appropriations have been increased 252 percent.

With respect to the increase in the number of employees, the Public Health Service had a 161-percent increase; while the Social Security Administration has had an increase of 82 percent.

We have had the best of cooperation with the State officers.

In a speech last year, the head of the Public Health Officers of the States said:

At this time, may be also extend to the Federal Security Administration, its Administrator and staff, our deep appreciation of the understanding of relationships which exist between the States and the Public Health Service. We commend to him the hope that he will further the relationship in the future which has, in our opinion, done so much to improve the health of the people of the United States.

I had planned to read over some of President Hoover's remarks in his testimony before, but I will not take the time to do that, because I appreciate that Senator Taft, Senator Fulbright, Senator Hunt, and Senator McCarthy, from what he said, feel that this plan is not in line with the Hoover Commission report; but the size of it is that Mr. Hoover says it is.

Nobody has to take his judgment on the thing, of course.

The point, as I see it, with respect to what Mr. Hoover said about the United Medical Services, is that it requires legislation. That bill is pending. Until that is created, there is no place to move the Health Services to.

In choosing this name, we did it for the very deliberate purpose of not freezing the Public Health Service in the agency.

Senator MCCARTHY. Am I correct in my understanding that you oppose the passage of that measure?

Mr. EwING. I will say that I do oppose the passage of that measure, but so do many veterans' organizations.

Senator MCCARTHY. I did not mean that in the form of criticism. Mr. EWING. No; I realize that. But what I do not see is how I would have a bit more influence as Secretary of Welfare than I would as Federal Security Administrator. And the idea that I have the power to stop the passage of the measure, that is flattering, but I do not think that that is altogether correct, because I think you gentlemen will do what you please.

Here is my feeling very strongly. The rejection of this plan really gets the doctors not 1 inch closer to what they want. They do not accomplish their objective one iota by rejecting this plan. They want a United Medical Administration. The way to do that is to get the bill out of the Labor Committee. Nothing is accomplished by defeating this plan. Their energies should be diverted over there.

I know it has been said that I want to boost myself into the Secretaryship. After all, that is just silly.

Senator IVES. Nobody could criticize you for that.

Mr. EWING. The only time, Senator Ives, that I have ever been fussy about position is when I was a notary public. I did not think they always paid due deference to that office.

Senator IVES. I have heard no criticism along that line.

Mr. EWING. As I see this thing, there are very large savings that can be accomplished if this plan is allowed to go into effect. I see none of the harmful results that the opponents of the plan anticipate.

I think the opponents are asking this committee and the Senate to repudiate the President. He has come down here with Reorganization Plan No. 1, which is needed. He needs to know, in his approach to the whole reorganization problem, what departments he has got to deal with. Those are the fundamental foundations of your executivedepartment structure; and, when he knows what departments he has got, then he can begin moving other units in and out. He has asked for one new department. To turn that down would be a repudiation of Reorganization Plan No. 1.

I think the opponents of this are asking this committee and the Senate to repudiate President Hoover and all of the work of the Hoover Commission. To me, it would just make a mockery of all they sought to accomplish, because here we have a plan that will save money; that will make for efficiency; that will make for economy, to my mind the value of the Reorganization Act of 1949 is absolutely at stake.

and

If a plan as innocuous as this can be defeated by a group that has such a remote interest, an imaginary interest, as the doctors in this thing

Senator MCCARTHY. May I interrupt, Mr. Chairman?

This committee, I do not believe, is dominated by any group.
Mr. EWING. Oh, no.

Senator MCCARTHY. Let me finish. I do not like to have someone come before us and state that some group is deciding some action for this committee to take. This committee met and considered a bill for 2 years, a bill introduced by Senator Taft and Senator Fulbright. The committee rejected unanimously the idea that is now in Reorganization Plan No. 1. We felt that the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the three departments, should be more independent than the President has provided for in Reorganization Plan No. 1. After 2 years of study, we felt that you should not concentrate the power in the Administrator-in yourself-that will be concentrated in Reorganization Plan No. 1. I do not believe we have any doctors or dentists sitting in this committee. I think it is an insult to the committee for anyone to intimate that the action we took, after 2 years of study, is due to pressure from any one group. We are subjected to pressure from yourself; we are subjected to pressure from the groups that feel as you do, Mr. Ewing, and we are subjected to pressure from many other groups; but I do think it is improper for a man to come before us and intimate that our actions will be decided by a special group.

I do not think, when this committee acted unanimously, after 2 letter for letter. Where has the pressure been coming from with regard to this plan?

Mr. EWING. Senator McCarthy, I not only think-I know-I didn't say that. I said that the opponents of this thing, who were a pressure group, were asking these things be done. That is a fact. There is no disputing that. I do not think you are going to do what these people want. I cannot conceive of your doing it.

Senator HUMPHREY. May I ask the Senator from Wisconsin whether he has much pressure from the proponents of the plan in his telegrams?

I want to ask the Senator if he is willing to bring his telegrams and stack them up against my telegrams. I mean, telegram for telegram,

where has the pressure been coming from with regard to this plan? plan?

I am a member of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, and I am on the subcommittee considering the United Medical Services bill; and I am here to tell you that I have not had one telegram, as a member of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, to consider the bill for the United Medical Services. If they want a United Medical Services program, why have we not had a positive affirmation of their desire for it? I have had not one single telegram.

Senator MCCARTHY. The question is, I believe, where is the pressure coming from? If you want to call it pressure, I think it is good pressure, from the people throughout the country, to adopt the Hoover Commission recommendations. There is pressure against adopting anything that is allegedly following the Hoover Commission's recommendations, but which is directly contrary to them. I feel that Reorganization Plans Nos. 3 to 7 are excellent, and in line with the Hoover Commission recommendations. I think plan No. 1 is not only contrary to the Hoover Commission recommendations, but it is directly contrary to the unanimous action this committee has taken.

Senator HUMPHREY. When was that action taken, by the way? Senator MCCARTHY. The thing I was taking exception to, even though I like Mr. Ewing personally-I think he is a fine and sociable gentleman, and a very good lobbyist-is for him to come before us and indicate that the actions we have heretofore taken, Republicans and Democrats alike, in unanimously adopting a plan that was directly contrary to Reorganization Plan No. 1, was the result of pressure from some special-interest groups.

I think that we all who sat here thought that was the best plan for the country as a whole. You see, Senator, you were not on

this committee.

Senator HUMPHREY. That was another Congress.

Senator MCCARTHY. Yes.

Senator HUMPHREY. We are talking about this Congress.

Senator MCCARTHY. Originally there was presented to this_committee the identical plan which Mr. Ewing submits. We rejected that in favor of keeping the three agencies.

I am sorry to take this time, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HUMPHREY. I still ask where is the pressure coming from now? Let us face the issue right now. You have said to the Federal Security Administrator that he has somehow or other told this committee that we are being pressured. Now, let the junior Senator from Minnesota ask you a question: Where is the pressure coming from?

Senator MCCARTHY. I do not know where your pressure is coming from.

Senator HUMPHREY. I think we should bring these things out. Senator MCCARTHY. I believe you are asking who is interested in the legislation. I know unquestionably that the doctors, the State officials, are.

In my State, you see, we have a plan. We have a plan that approaches quite closely the plan this committee has approved.