USE OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS

SEC. 18. (a) Any Government agency is authorized to use for the disposition of property under this Act and for its completion, care, and handling, pending such disposition, any funds heretofore or hereafter appropriated, allocated, or available to it for such purposes or for the purpose of production or procurement of such property.

(b) Any Government agency is authorized to use in payment for the transfer to it of any surplus property under this Act any funds heretofore or hereafter appropriated, allocated, or available to it for the acquisition of property of the same kind.

(c) There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary or appropriate for administering the provisions of this Act.

DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

SEC. 19. (a) The Administrator may delegate any authority and discretion conferred upon him by this Act to any Deputy Administrator, and may delegate such authority and discretion, upon such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, to the head of any Government agency to the extent necessary to the handling and solution of problems peculiar to that agency.

(b) The head of any Government agency may delegate, and authorize successive redelegations of, any authority and discretion conferred upon him or his agency by or pursuant to this Act to any officer, agent, or employee of such agency or, with the approval of the Administrator, to any other Government agency.

(c) Any two or more Government agencies may exericse jointly any authority and discretion conferred upon each of them individually by or pursuant to this Act.

APPLICABILITY

SEC. 20. All policies and procedures relating to surplus property prescribed by the Surplus War Property Administration, created by Executive Order Numbered 9425, dated February 19, 1944, or any other Government agency, in effect upon the effective date of this Act, and not inconsistent with this Act, shall remain in full force and effect unless and until superseded by regulations of the Administrator or of the agency in accordance with this Act.

SEC. 21. (a) Nothing in this Act shall limit or affect the authority of commanders in active theaters of military operations to dispose of property in their control.

(b) The provisions of this Act shall be applicable to dispositions of property within the United States and elsewhere, but the Administrator may exempt from some or all of the provisions hereof, dispositions of property located outside of the continental United States or in Alaska, whenever he deems that such provisions would obstruct the efficient and economic disposition of such property in accordance with the objectives of this Act.

SEC. 22. (a) The authority conferred by this Act is in addition to any authority conferred by any other law and shall not be subject to the provisions of any law inconsistent herewith. This Act shall not impair or affect any authority for the disposition of property under any other law, except that the Administrator may prescribe regulations to govern any disposition of surplus property under any such authority to the same extent as if the disposition were made under this Act, whenever he deems such action necessary to effectuate the objectives and policies of this Act.

(b) Nothing in this Act shall impair or affect the provisions of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended; or the Act of October 2, 1942 (ch. 578, 56 Stat. 765), as amended; or of section 301 of the Second War Powers Act, 1942; or of the Act of March 11, 1941 (55 Stat. 31), as amended; or Acts supplemental thereto, or of any law regulating the exportation of property from the United States.

EFFECTIVE DATE; EXPIRATION

SEC. 23. This Act shall become effective from the date of its enactment. Unless extended by law, this Act shall expire at the end of three years following the date of the cessation of hostilities in the present war, as proclaimed by the President or by concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress.

SEPARABILITY OF PROVISIONS

SEC. 24. If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Act or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby.

SHORT TITLE

SEC. 25. This Act may be cited as the "Surplus Property Act of 1944."

The CHAIRMAN. We have invited to be present this morning the members of the subcommittee of the Special House Committee on Post-war Economic Policy and Planning, who have been making a study of this subject, to give us the benefit of the studies they have been making for the past few months.

(Discussion off the record.)

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad at this time so have a statement from Mr. Colmer, the chairman of the House Special Committee on Post-war Economic Policy and Planning.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM M. COLMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, AND CHAIRMAN OF HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON POST-WAR ECONOMIC POLICY AND PLANNING

Mr. COLMER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, in reference to the bill you have under consideration, H. R. 5125, as you know, this special committee was set up by the House to make studies of these various phases of the post-war economic policy and planning, but the committee, of course, has no legislative jurisdiction. The committee has, for the past 6 or 8 months, been conducting hearings on the general, over-all post-war problems.

On the question of the disposal of surplus Government property, the Post-war Planning Committee of the House and the Post-war Planning Committee of the Senate had some joint sessions at which Mr. Clayton appeared, and at which every department of the Government was represented. They all appeared before the joint committee of the Senate and the House and those hearings are printed. In addition to that, we had Mr. Clayton appear twice before our Post-war Planning Committee on this subject.

Also, Mr. Manasco, your distinguished chairman of this committee, the Committee on Expenditures in Executive Departments, as chairman of a subcommittee of the House Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, of which the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Lanham, is chairman, made some extensive studies of this matter, and the hearings held by that subcommittee are all printed.

As a result of those hearings, particularly the hearings before the two post-war committees in joint session, this bill which you have before you this morning was drafted and introduced, and it is now before you for the consideration of your committee, to which it was referred.

In view of all that, and in view of the time element involved, we do not believe that there is any necessity for going into extensive hearings on this bill. Of course, we are your guests here and we are not attempting to run your committee or to tell you how to run it, but that is our thought, and is also the thought of the leadership.

I might also say this: As you recall, there was a bill passed, a rather small bill, which passed the House more than a year ago, on this subject, which has been in the Senate since that time.

We think that this bill is a pretty good bill. We think it is rather comprehensive. Of course, it is not a perfect bill, and there are some changes that possibly should be made. In fact, I have in mind a few I would like to see made.

But I do believe, and I think you will agree with me, that rather than proceed as some have suggested, if we leave this matter to the Senate now and let the Senate pass another bill and put it on the bill we passed last year, which was not a comprehensive bill, and then let the final draft be written in conference, that perhaps the House would not be doing its full service and making its full contribution in this matter. Then this bill would be practically written in conference and we would have very little to say about it in the House. In addition to that, the Senate is attacking rather vigorously some other problems involved in this whole demobilization plan.

I want to say this, in addition, Mr. Chairman. During the past week we have had some conferences on the Hill with the leadership, and I think I can say without divulging any secrets, that the idea of leadership is to try to dispose of this legislation, the surplus property legislation, the whole over-all demobilization bill, and the question of social security and unemployment compensation, having those subjects in two or three bills, and then recessing around the first of September until after the elections.

Mr. COCHRAN. I would like to ask the chairman if he was at these conferences to which Mr. Colmer referred?

The CHAIRMAN. Not all of them.

Mr. COCHRAN. Who were at the conferences? Do you not think some members of this committee should have been asked to attend the conferences that were held, at which they decided what this committee was to do and what it was not to do?

Mr. COLMER. Possibly so, but being an invited guest myself, I would be a little hesitant about passing an opinion on the question. Mr. BENDER. Who is on the subcommittee that has been referred

to?

Mr. COLMER. The subcommittee consists of Mr. Walter, Mr. Zimmerman, Mr. Worley, Mr. Reece, of Tennessee, Mr. Hope, and Mr. Wolcott.

Mr. BENDER. Is this bill satisfactory to your committee?
Mr. COLMER. I cannot undertake-

Mr. GOSSETT. You stated you had some suggestions or amendments. I think you might give us the benefit of those suggestions, if you will defer that answer for a moment. You are talking about procedures? Mr. COLMER. Yes. That, Mr. Chairman, pretty largely completes my own statement. We have here this morning Mr. Folsom, who is the director of our committee staff, and who, with your permission, I am going to ask to make a statement about the bill.

Mr. COCHRAN. Before he does that, I would like to ask a question. You stated you felt there should be some amendments to this bill. I read part 1 of the hearings of your committee, particularly the testimony of Mr. Clayton, in which he suggested certain changes in the bill. Are the changes that Mr. Clayton suggested before this joint committee embodied in this bill?

Mr. COCHRAN. I want to say that for a year or more I have been trying to get the Senate to do something about this. It has only been in the last 10 days that anybody took the initiative in an effort to get some of this war legislation_out.

That followed the statement of Justice Byrnes, and I think I was a little bit responsible for some of that activity.

Mr. COLMER. From what I know about it, you were the one. Mr. COCHRAN. I have talked to Lister Hill not once, but a dozen times, about the bill that this committee reported and the House passed. I have pleaded with him to get something done.

Unfortunately, I was not here when the bill was passed, or when the hearings were held. I was ill. But I did read the Record at the time, and I think Mr. Whittington did a fine job in the way he handled that bill at that time.

The President repeatedly has asked Congress to do something, but Congress did not do it.

Then, under his war powers the President set up this agency with Mr. Clayton at the head of it, and not only the President but Mr. Clayton have appealed to Congress to do something, to accept our responsibility rather than having that handled under an Executive order.

We are having this hearing today, and the Senate will first take up the Kilgore-Murray-George bill today or tomorrow. I do not know when this bill might be reported in the Senate, but it was my thought, as I expressed it to you that we are entitled to some consideration on this side of the Capitol, in view of the fact that we initiated it, regardless of the merits of the bill passed by the House.

I do not care what the membership of the committee want to do about it, but it seems to me the Senate should pay a little attention to the House in connection with this legislation, putting in their own language if they want to do that.

Mr. COLMER. If you will permit, let me say I am in thorough accord with that statement.

I think since this bill that was passed does not meet the situation, and since we have the ball, so to speak, on this legislation, it seems to me we ought to go ahead with it rather than leave it to the Senate. (Discussion off the record.)

Mr. COLMER. Of course, we cannot control the action that the Senate may take, but we can control our own action, and I think we should take some action and not wait for the Senate.

Mr. Chairman, that about completes my statement. Of course, we are not trying to tell you what to do; we are here to cooperate with you in any way we can.

But as I said, I do not think there is any occasion for extended hearings. I cannot see any reason for any public hearings. But if the joint committees want to call on any representatives of any department, or anybody else, I think that should be done. But if you open up this matter and have open hearings I think you will be here indefinitely.

Mr. BENDER. I would like to know, and I think the members of this committee would like to know whether the members of your com

mittee who are here are in accord with the views expressed by the chairman of the special committee?

I have every confidence in the membership of this subcommittee, but I would like to know on what points they disagree, if there are any such, or if they are in complete accord.

Mr. Hope, Mr. Zimmerman, Mr. Walter, and Mr. O'Brien are here, and I would like to know if they have any questions about this matter. If there is not any disagreement I think we will save a lot of time by going ahead.

Mr. WALTER. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that if you will permit Mr. Folsom to make a statement in reference to this matter and explain the bill, I think that at the conclusion of his statement you will be convinced that nothing can be gained by holding further hearings. This whole subject has been so thoroughly gone into that I am sure Mr. Folsom will be able to so enlighten you that you will be convinced that there is no necessity for further hearings.

Mr. COCHRAN. Let me ask this question before we proceed, and I think this will answer Mr. Bender's question. Are the sentiments that are going to be expressed by Mr. Folsom the sentiments of your committee?

Mr. WALTER. That is true.

Mr. COCHRAN. Then he is speaking for your committee, and there is no disagreement among the members of your committee in reference to any suggestion he might make as to changes?

Mr. WALTER. That is right.

Mr. HOPE. I do not understand that the committee has agreed as to every line and syllable in this bill, but I think I can say that we are in general accord with what has been put in this bill as being a working basis for consideration. I think we are all agreed on that.

Mr. McCONNELL. May I ask Mr. Colmer a question?

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.

Mr. McCONNELL. In the hearings to which you referred, when you heard Mr. Clayton and representatives of Government departments, were they the only ones represented?

Mr. COLMER. I think that is correct.

Mr. McCONNELL. There were just Government men there; no outsiders?

Mr. WALTER. That was at the joint sessions. I think on the general proposition we heard a number of people. We heard from labor and from employers.

Mr. McCONNELL. I understood Mr. Wilson, of General Motors, appeared?

Mr. COLMER. He did.

Mr. WALTERS. As a matter of fact, changes in the bill were submitted to the National Association of Manufacturers and the chamber of commerce.

Mr. COLMER. We also had Mr. Green, of the American Federation of Labor, and invited Mr. Murray, but he did not come down

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that a letter be sent to the chairman of every committee of the House that has held hearings on this subject, asking them to take this bill and review it and submit to us immediately any suggestions they have in reference to this bill, with a statement as to why they feel that such changes that they may suggest should be made.