to individual savings institutions (which pay most of the cost of the Board and the Insurance Corporation). 5. The existence of two boards, with overlapping responsibilities for the savings and loan operation, would result in conflicts of policy and great confusion in the business as well as to Congress and the President. I would like to also inform you that we are interested in and will support any constructive improvement in the supervision of the savings and loan business, and inform you that the United States Savings & Loan League currently is making careful, painstaking study of the Federal Home Loan Bank's system with that end in view. Best personal regards, H. THOMAS DUNCK, Executive Vice President. ST. CHARLES SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Re Reorganization Plan No. 2: Savings and loan associations Mr. WILLIAM L. DAWSON, Chairman, Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We, officers and members of the St. Charles Savings & Loan Association are opposed to this proposed Reorganization Plan No. 2. We feel this would bring an additional work in that the savings and loan would have to file separate reports, one to the Home Loan Bank Board and one to the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. There would undoubtedly be added examination costs, as this plan would create another separate agency. This would not result in economy of operation but, rather, would increase the expense of the Government agencies to individual savings institutions. The existence of two boards, with overlapping responsibilities for savings and loan operation, would undoubtedly result in conflict of policy and confusion. We feel it unwise to tamper with the present single agency which was developed over the past 25 years by congressional enactments, and has resulted in a strong progressive nationwide system of savings and loan institutions. While this, we understand is a Presidential proposal, we feel it very doubtful that the President was made fully aware of the effect on our business, or of its reaction on the thousands of individual members throughout the Nation. Our institution is interested in and will support any constructive improvement in the supervision of the savings and loan business. The United States Savings & Loan League is presently making a careful study of the Federal Home Loan Bank System with that end in view. We thank you in advance for careful consideration of this matter and hope you will lend your efforts toward defeating Reorganization Plan No. 2. Very truly yours, JOHN T. MCCONKEY, President. THE STANDARD BUILDING & LOAN CO., Reference Reorganization Plan No. 2, Federal Home Loan Bank. Chairman, House Committee on Government Operations, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: This institution wishes to express their sincere opposition to the proposed change in the Federal Home Loan Bank Board as proposed in Reorganization Plan No. 2, for the following reasons: 1. The present single agency handling the savings and loan affairs was developed over the past quarter of a century by numerous congressional enactments, and has resulted in a strong and progressive nationwide system of savings institutions, which now finance 37 percent of all home loans. 2. We question the wisdom of tampering with this present successful, single agency as being highly questionable and dangerous. 3. The organization as planned would create still another separate agency. 4. Unlike most reorganization plans proposed, this would not result in economy of operation, but, rather, would increase the expense of Government agencies to individual savings institutions who pay most of the cost of the Board and the Insurance Corporation. 5. The existence of two boards, with overlapping responsibilities for the savings and loan operation, would result in conflicts of policy and great confusion in the business as well as to Congress and the President. In behalf of this institution, we wish to emphasize that we are always interested in, and will support any constructive improvement as a savings and loan business. The United States League, as you probably are aware, is making a careful, painstaking study of the Federal Home Loan Bank System with that end in view. Very truly yours, GEORGE E. REIFF, President. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., June 26, 1956. Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON, Chairman, Committee on Government Operations, United States House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I refer the enclosed letter from the president of a savings and loan association in my district to your committee and respectfully request that the viewpoint expressed be given consideration. Very sincerely, JAMES J. DELANEY, Member of Congress. Hon. JAMES J. DELANEY, Brooklyn, N. Y. WOODSIDE SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, DEAR CONGRESSMAN: Here at the Woodside Savings we are all opposed to the President's Reorganization Plan No. 2, calling for a separation of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation from the Federal Home Loan Bank Board. We think it is a bad plan. It will cost needless expense to the savings business of this country and will also subject us to two conflicting kinds of authority. The present system is pretty good and should certainly be preserved. We would apreciate anything you can do to stop this reorganization plan from being put into effect. Sincerely, JEROME Z. LORBER, President. (Letters submitted by Hon. L. H. Fountain follow :) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., June 26, 1956. Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON, Chairman, Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I will appreciate your making a part of your record of hearings in connection with Reorganization Plan No. 2 the attached corre spondence. I do not care to burden the record of your hearings with a detailed statement about Reorganization Plan No. 2. I simply want to say that on the basis of the study which I have thus far made of this plan, and the results to be expected, I am opposed to it. I do not believe its enactment will bring greater economy and efficiency. On the contrary, I envision in the splintering of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board by separating the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation from the Board and creating it as another independent agency reporting to the Congress and to the President, increased operating costs, conflicts between agencies, unnecessary duplication of effort, and increased paperwork and confusion. I still have one basic objection to all of these reorganization plans, even though I have supported some of them. I just don't believe in a congressional policy, as set forth in the Reorganization Act, of delegating legislative authority to the Executive in such a way that it takes a two-thirds vote of the Congress to disapprove action contemplated by the Executive. In other words, we give the executive branch the authority to legislate, and then we tie our hands by saying whatever the Executive does by way of reorganization of our Government will become final unless by a two-thirds affirmative vote the Congress disapproves its action. I hope that your committee will continue to give this matter study with a view of proposing such amendments to the reorganization plan as will reinstate the constitutional position of the Congress in connection with all such legislation. Sincerely, Hon. L. H. FOUNTAIN, L. H. FOUNTAIN, Member of Congress. UNITED STATES SAVINGS AND LOAN LEAGUE, Chicago, Ill., June 15, 1956. House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN: The purpose of this letter is to express opposition to Reorganization Plan No. 2 which would splinter the Federal Home Loan Bank Board by separating the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation from the Board and create it as another independent agency reporting to Congress and the President. Last year Congress reestablished the Federal Home Loan Bank Board as the agency to be responsible for matters affecting the Nation's 4,200 thrift and home financing institutions. We have indicated to the President that we recognize the need for constant study and improvement in the operation of the Board, as in any private organization and operation, so that the public interest may best be served. We have pledged to the administration and to the Banking Committees of Congress our complete cooperation in bringing about any sound programs that may be needed in this area. Reorganization Plan No. 2, however, was submitted without any consultation with the Banking and Currency Committees which have jurisdiction in this particular field, or the responsible leadership of the savings and loan business which bears the entire expense of the operation of the agencies affected by this plan. We can see no need for the changes it proposes. We urge that you oppose the approval of Reorganization Plan No. 2 for the following reasons: 1. Reorganization Plan No. 2 will not result in any operating economies for the Government, because all expenses of both the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation and of the Federal Home Loan Bank System are borne by their members-not by the Government. In fact, the plan will result in greater administrative expenses for the agencies dealing with the savings and loan business, all of which will be borne by the savings and loan associations themselves. 2. The plan creates an additional independent agency which will have responsibility and jurisdiction for the proper conduct of savings and loan associations; it will result in conflicts between agencies, buckpassing and controversies between agencies, duplication of personnel, substantially increased paperwork and confusion to savings and loan associations, to the Congress and to the President. 3. Although it is stated that the proposal is one of the recommendations of the second Hoover Commission, such recommendation was not supported with any documentation. On the other hand, the Hoover Commission's task force dealing with this subject specifically reviewed the present status and observed that "this appears to be a natural grouping of functions which requires no change." 4. The plan violates the congressional philosophy of reorganization plans in that instead of effecting economy, it establishes 2 agencies in place of 1, clearly increasing operating costs. In addition to these basic questions, the plan has unusual defects in that it does not fix specific terms of office for the members of the proposed new board, and would not provide for a bipartisan board. The division of responsibilities of the two boards that would be created by this plan was left unresolved. We respectfully urge that you take any and all actions necessary to see that Reorganization Plan No. 2 is not placed into effect. Sincerely yours, WALTER H. DREIER, President. Congressman L. H. FOUNTAIN, FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Washington, D. C. DEAR L. H. It is the consensus of the best thought in our business that Reorganization Plan No. 2 will be detrimental to the best interest of the savings and loan industry, as we definitely believe that it will be unwise to divide the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation and the Federal Home Loan Bank into two separate agencies. Your opposition to Reorganization Plan No. 2 is urged and will be deeply appreciated. Sincerely yours, Congressman L. H. FOUNTAIN, HENRY GREGORY, Jr., MUTUAL BUILDING & LOAN ASSOCIATION, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR L. H.: I want to express my opposition to Reorganization Plan No. 2 and urge you to work and vote to defeat it. The present, single agency to handle savings and loan affairs has resulted in a strong and progressive nationwide system of savings institutions. The existence of two boards, with overlapping responsibilities for the savings and loan operation, would result in conflicts of policy and great confusion in the business as well as to Congress and the President. Very truly yours, Re Reorganization Plan No. 2. Hon. L. H. FOUNTAIN, T. W. HEATH, Jr., Executive Vice President. HOME BUILDING & LOAN ASSOCIATION, House Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We are in full sympathy with the statements concerning this plan as made by the United States Savings and Loan League, the North Carolina State Savings and Loan League, and the resolutions as made by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board. We strongly urge you to consider the comments of the above-mentioned, and further urge you to wholeheartedly endorse the defeat of said plan. Very truly yours, A. H. PATTERSON, Secretary-Treasurer. FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, Hendersonville, N. C., June 20, 1956. DEAR MR. FOUNTAIN: We wish to express our opposition on subject reorganization plan which vitally affects the operations of insured savings and loan associations. This reorganization would make separate agencies of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation and would move it from under the Federal Home Loan Bank Board. The excuse of the administration in proposing this reorganization is that it was recommended by the Hoover Commission report. Actually there is small similarity between the Hoover Commission recommendation and this plan. Furthermore, it seems to operate contrary to the generally defined purposes of all reorganization plans in that it increases the number of Government agencies, creates an overlapping and duplication of effort, does not group or coordinate functions but rather diffuses them, and it certainly does not reduce the total operating cost of the Government. At the North Carolina Savings and Loan League convention at Blowing Rock last week, there was strong opposition to this reorganization plan on the floor of the convention and in informal groups and discussions. Your support in opposing this reorganization plan will be appreciated. FRANK L. HOYLE, Jr., Executive Vice President. Hon. L. H. FOUNTAIN, EDENTON BUILDING & LOAN ASSOCIATION, House of Representatives Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: Our association respectfully requests that you actively oppose and vote against Reorganization Plan No. 2 now under consideration by the Senate Committee on Government Operations. This proposed plan, if adopted, will in our opinion, inevitably result in more overlapping and duplication of effort; higher cost of administration, without any increase in efficiency. We urge your most serious and favorable consideration in this important matter. Very truly yours, R. E. LEARY, Secretary. FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF GREENSBORO, Hon. LAWRENCE H. FOUNTAIN, We are enclosing a copy of a resolution adopted by the bank's board of directors on June 18, 1956, which we hope you will consider in your deliberations on Reorganization Plan No. 2. You will notice that the bank's directors commend and approve the position in opposition to the plan which has been taken by the Federal Savings and Loan Advisory Council and the national savings and loan trade organizations. Yours very truly, J. M. SINK, Jr., President. FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF GREENSBORO, Greensboro, N. C. RESOLUTION Whereas Reorganization Plan No. 2, heretofore submitted to the Congress of the United States, provides for a drastic change in the organization and operation of the Federal agencies by separating the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation from the Federal Home Loan Bank Board; and Whereas the Federal Savings & Loan Advisory Council has adopted a resolution urging the rejection of said Reorganization Plan No. 2; and Whereas the savings and loan national trade organizations have taken prompt and vigorous action to alert the savings and loan business and the Congress to the dangers and weaknesses of Reorganization Plan No. 2, and have adopted a program of opposition to the plan: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the board of directors of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Greensboro commend and approve the actions of the Federal Savings & Loan |