precise number, but I think about 300 people, of which 59 are assigned as the proportion properly assignable against ECA. These people, by the way, represent the principal staff, the senior staff, in the economic area of the Department of State. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. I understand that, but we are talking about the ECA force. As I understand, the division you speak of deals with a great deal more than ECA. One thing I would like to have is a table for the Office of the Special Representative which will show by division the number of personnel now on the rolls and the number of personnel asked for in 1951. Mr. BARROWS. Here is a table, sir, that has been prepared for the record. (The table above referred to will be found on p. 424.) Mr. TABER. Your request for more employees than you have currently comes in the face of a cut of 25 percent in the overall program of shipments and of anywhere from 35 to 20 percent in the programs of each individual country. I have just been going over these programs, and it is kind of peculiar that we are being asked for a larger number of employees to do a smaller job. In this confederated program in Germany, you are only asking for an increase of three, whereas the coverage that those people might have would perhaps be more; but in the others where there is always a decrease below the activity that was covered before by your people, you are asking for more. That kind of impresses me. I do not know; maybe I am wrong. Mr. FOSTER. I have attempted to explain that. Mr. TABER. I know you gave us a reason for having that increase; on the other hand, it did not seem to me to be too sound. Mr. FOSTER. I can only state that there is no direct ratio between the number of dollars in this and the number of persons. Actually, of course, we are asking for less authorized positions next year than we now have and are operating under, but there is no immediate dropping in the volume of activity simply because during next year the ultimate total authorized will be less. We have actually more functions to perform than we have had in the past, because the governments there are asking for more help in more different directions. I can only state in general principles that it is a very small part of the total amount of money which is being made available for this purpose. It seems to me the record of performance indicates we are not spending the money unwisely. I think it adds to a better administration of the whole performance, and to me, as a businessman, it is a very cheap fee for the continued economical and successful administration. And the new activities in which we are engaged are activities which require considerably more work. GOVERNMENT IN OCCUPIED AREAS OF GERMANY WITNESSES JOHN J. McCLOY, UNITED STATES HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR GERMANY GLENN G. WOLFE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION FOR HICOG HENRY A. BYROADE, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF GERMAN AFFAIRS ARTHUR A. KIMBALL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF GERMAN AFFAIRS WILLIAM O. HALL, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, DEPARTMENT OF STATE EDWARD B. WILBER, BUDGET OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF STATE PERRY LAUKHUFF, OFFICER IN CHARGE, GERMAN POLITICAL AFFAIRS JACQUES J. REINSTEIN, OFFICER IN CHARGE, GERMAN ECONOMIC AFFAIRS HENRY J. KELLERMAN, OFFICER IN CHARGE, GERMAN AND AUSTRIAN PUBLIC AFFAIRS IRVING S. SCHWARTZ, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF GERMAN AFFAIRS FLETCHER D. MITCHELL, JR., CHIEF, BUDGET AND FINANCE DIVISION, HICOG Mr. GARY. We will now take up the estimated requirements for government in occupied areas of Germany. We will place in the record at this point the tables showing the summary of requirements for the fiscal year 1951, appearing on pages 1 to 7 of the justifications. (The tables referred to follow :) Summary of requirements, fiscal year 1951 Transferred from "Government and relief in occupied areas, Department of the Army, 1950"-- $21, 686, 000 Base for 1951 Net difference, 1951 over 1950: 4,889,000 |