the application of title VI is limited to persons in the United States. Programs of assistance to Indians are also omitted. Indians have a special status under the Constitution and treaties. Nothing in title VI is intended to change that status or to preclude special assistance to Indians. Programs which involve Federal payments to regular school districts which provide education to Indians as well as non-Indians have, however, been included since such programs can be regarded as a form of assistance to the school district. 4. The dollar amounts shown do not in each case afford a reliable indication of the magnitude of the assisted program or activity. In a number of cases, the total Federal expenditures for a given line item in the budget have been shown even though only a small portion or aspect of the program covered by that line item might involve financial assistance within the scope of title VI.2 On the other hand, certain very large items which may involve relatively very small amounts of Federal financial assistance have been omitted to avoid undue distortion. Examples include: AEC, a small part of whose expenditures may have been spent on assistance payments to States, localities, and private entities; research and development activities related to national defense and other direct governmental functions, a small part of which involve grants, fellowships, and other assistance payments; and procurement, some part of which may possibly be considered to involve special assistance to contractors. Similarly, while programs involving donation of commodities, in kind, would appear to be within the scope of title VI, and such programs have been included in the attached list where clearly identifiable, no attempt has been made to identify, or place a dollar figure on, all programs involving donation of property, or disposition at less than fair value. 5. It should not be assumed that each program shown on the attached list will be significantly affected by the enactment of title VI. Title VI expresses a general, across-the-board Government policy, which has potential impact on a great number and variety of programs. The attached list attempts to identify those programs which might potentially be affected, although some may have been overlooked. In fact, however, title VI is expected to have little practical impact on many of the programs listed, for the reason that they are now being administered in a manner which conforms with the policy declared by title VI. Indeed, explicit nondiscrimination policies have been adopted by executive action in recent years in many areas, including housing, airports, and employment on federally assisted construction, while other programs either do not present practical possibilities for discrimination, or have long been administered in ways which preclude discrimination. The impact of title VI is further limited by the fact that it relates only to participation in, receipt of benefits of, or discrimination under, a federally assisted program. As to each assisted program or activity, therefore, title VI will require an identification of those persons whom Congress regarded as participants and beneficiaries, and in respect of whom the policy declared by title VI would apply. For example, the purpose of benefit payments to producers of agricultural commodities, under 7 U.S.C. 608, is to "establish and maintain * * * orderly marketing conditions for agricultural commodities in interstate commerce" (7 U.S.C. 602). The act is not concerned with farm employment. As applied to this Federal assistance program, title VI would preclude discrimination in connection with the eligibility of farmers to obtain benefit payments, but it would not affect the employment policies of a farmer receiving such payments. The effect of title VI, on most of the programs shown on the attached list, will be to provide statutory support for action already being taken to preclude discrimination, to make certain that such action is continued in future years as a permanent part of our national policy, and to require each department and agency administering a program which may involve Federal financial assistance to review its administration to make sure that adequate action has been taken to preclude discrimination and to take any action which may be shown to be necessary by such review. In addition, title VI will override those provisions of existing Federal law which contemplate financial assistance to "separate but equal" facilities. Assistance to such facilities appears to be contemplated under the Hill-Burton Act (42 U.S.C. 291e (f)-hospital construction), the second Morrill Act (7 U.S.C. For example, the item listed as "forest protection and utilization" under the Department of Agriculture is shown at its total 1963 expenditure of $197,242,562 although only a small amount of that total is to be spent for State and local grants which come within the scope of title VI. Costs of administration have also been included except where they appear as a separate line item in the budget. 323—land-grant colleges) and Public Law 815 (20 U.S.C. 636(b)(F)—school construction). The U.S. Court of Appeals of the Fourth Circuit has recently held the "separate but equal" provision of the Hill-Burton Act unconstitutional. Simkins v. Moses Cone Memorial Hospital, decided November 1, 1963. Title VI would override all such "separate but equal" provisions without the need for further litigation, and would give, to the Federal agencies administering laws which contain such provisions, a clear directive to take action to effectuate the provisions of title VI. I regret that it is impossible to supply more meaningful dollar figures with respect to programs of assistance potentially affected by title VI. As indicated, the amounts set out in the accompanying chart are almost all total expenditure figures, rather than the considerably smaller portions thereof which could be affected by title VI. Of course, most of the programs of Federal assistance included on the list are already administered on a nondiscriminatory basis, and, thus, though within the literal scope of title VI and included on the list would not be affected by enactment of the title. I particularly stress the regrettable, though unavoidable, difficulties inherent in the attached list in order to forestall any misunderstanding or distorition of its significance or meaning by either proponents or opponents of the legislation. Sincerely yours, NICHOLAS DEB. KATZENBACH, Programs which may involve Federal financial assistance Executive Office of the President: Office of Emergency Planning: State and local preparedness (p. 52). Funds appropriated to the President: Disaster relief: disaster relief (p. 59). Expansion of defense production: Revolving fund, Defense 1963 expenditures 0 $30,802,990 -56,513,274 61,843,808 3,110,295 37,992, 460 Special milk program (p. 113). School lunch program (p. 114). Removal of surplus agricultural commodities (p. 116). Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service: Expenses, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (p. 122).. Sugar Act program (p. 125). Agricultural conservation program (p. 125) 74,687,584 Land-use adjustment program (p. 127) Emergency conservation measures (p. 127). Conservation reserve program (p. 127) Commodity Credit Corporation: Price support and related programs and special milk National Wool Act (p. 137)_ Rural Electrification Administration: Loan authorizations (p. 148) 304,342,305 3,486,356,042 69,164,861 331, 656, 082 Programs which may involve Federal financial assistance-Continued Department of Agriculture-Continued Farmers Home Administration: Rural housing grants and loans (p. 151). Rural renewal (p. 153).. 1963 expenditures $184, 203, 524 0 Direct loan account (p. 153). Emergency credit revolving fund (p. 156). Rural housing for the elderly revolving fund (p. 155)__ Forest Service: Forest protection and utilization (p. 170).. Assistance to States for tree planting (p. 176) Payments to States, national forests fund (p. 177).. Department of Commerce: Area Redevelopment Administration: Grants for public facilities (p. 188).. Area redevelopment fund (p. 188). Office of Trade Adjustment: Trade adjustment assistance (p. 202) Maritime Administration: Ship construction (p. 223).. Operating-differential subsidies (p. 224) - State marine schools (p. 227). Bureau of Public Roads: Forest highways (p. 237).. Public lands highways (p. 239). Control of outdoor advertising (p. 239). Highway trust fund (p. 241) _ . Department of Defense: Military personnel: National Guard personnel, Army (p. 253). Operation and maintenance: Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard 58,948, 965 7, 888, 613 0 197, 242, 562 1, 203, 697 125, 366 303, 074 80, 462 27, 235, 140 476, 848 -499, 532 2, 820 107, 483, 152 220, 676, 686 3, 297, 777 1, 420, 724 38, 525, 999 2, 128, 990 0 13, 017, 268, 879 212, 109, 751 45, 366, 036 National Board for Promotion of Rifle Practice, Army Military construction: 174, 059, 283 Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard 193, 258, 395 650, 368 18, 383, 216 21, 912, 946 34, 457, 221 11, 810, 129 1, 613, 757 Military construction, Army National Guard (p. 306). Operation and maintenance, civil defense (p. 313)____. Civil functions: Payments to States, Flood Control Act of 1 This amount is on a checks-issued (gross) basis. Receipts (collections deposited) totaled $3,292,965,983 in fiscal year 1963. Programs which may involve Federal financial assistance-Continued Department of Health, Education, and Welfare: Office of Education: Promotion and further development of vocational edu- Further endowment of colleges of agriculture and me- Grants for library services (p. 402). Payments to school districts (p. 402). Assistance for school construction (p. 403). Expansion of teaching in education of the mentally Expansion of teaching in the education of the deaf Cooperative research (p. 406) Foreign language training and area studies (p. 407). (p. 409). Office of Vocational Rehabilitation: Grants to States (p. 409) Research and training (p. 410) – Public Health Service: Accident prevention (p. 415). Chronic diseases and health of the aged (p. 416). Community health practice and research (p. 419). 10, 749, 235 23, 946, 767 Control of venereal diseases (p. 420). Dental services and resources (p. 421). Communicable disease activities (p. 417) Control of tuberculosis (p. 420)....... Nursing services and resources (p. 422). Hospital construction activities (p. 423). George Washington University Hospital construction Aid to medical education (p. 424)- Air pollution (p. 425)- Milk, food, interstate and community sanitation (p. 426). Occupational health (p. 427) Radiological health (p. 428) Water supply and water pollution control (p. 429). Grants for waste treatment works construction (p. 430) – Social Security Administration: 6, 813, 635 7,843, 535 2, 603, 482 8, 373, 620 187, 432, 190 Grants to States for public assistance (p. 460). Training of public welfare personnel (p. 463) Assistance for repatriated U.S. nationals (p. 464). Assistance to refugees in the United States (p. 469). the blind (p. 472)_. Gallaudet College: Salaries and expenses (p. 474)....... Salaries and expenses (p. 475). Office of the Secretary: Juvenile delinquency and youth offenses (p. 480) - Educational television facilities.... 2,723, 677, 540 0 412, 044 76,057, 662 952, 654 52, 902, 237 718, 707 1, 458, 615 8, 362, 261 2,687, 024 4, 473, 623 1, 818 Programs which may involve Federal financial assistance-Continued Department of the Interior: Bureau of Land Management: Payments to Oklahoma (royalties) (p. 491). Payments to Coos and Douglas Counties, Oreg., from Payments to States (grazing fees) (p. 492)_ Payments to States from grazing receipts, etc., public 1963 expenditures $6, 214 697, 449 15, 400, 136 917 249, 328 183, 632 200, 446 3, 902 47, 147, 555 92, 255 Payments to counties, national grasslands (p. 492)_ Senator ERVIN. Do you have questions, Senator Javits? Senator JAVITS. Yes, I do; on title V. Section 502, Mr. Attorney General, provides changes in the penalties for violation of title 18 of sections 241 and 242. Long terms are provided if death results, but no intermediate penalties are available in the case of serious injury. Under section 242, for example, the penalty is $1,000 or 1 year for any offense where death does not result. Why is there not, for example, a greater penalty for cases of serious injury, aggravated assault, et cetera? I have offered that kind of provision and I just wondered why the administration didn't? Attorney General KATZENBACH. The reason for that, it is extremely difficult, Senator, in many instances, to get a grand jury in parts of the country, despite what I would hope would happen as a result of the enactment of this, to hand down an indictment in these intermediate cases, and the reason that we did this, if my recollection is correct, is to preserve the policy of being able to proceed by information which we can on the lower penalty. Senator JAVITS. Wouldn't the same purpose be served, Mr. Attorney General, if you had a maximum and minimum penalty in those cases? It seems to me that Attorney General KATZENBACH. Putting an intermediate step in here? Senator JAVITS. Yes. I will tell you why I say that. It seems to me that if you seek to make the punishment more adequately fit the crime, and that is what you are doing in death cases, and I think that is eminently preserved, then you have to follow through because you have no assurance, even in death cases, that there are going to be convictions, but you do want an overhanging high penalty so that a potential criminal has at least got to stare that in the face. He is gambling that the jury is going to let him off. I think the same argument, and I would hope that you would give that consideration, would apply to these so-called intermediate cases. Attorney General KATZENBACH. I would point out, I know you are aware of it, Senator, but, of course, in the specific instance covered here in section 501, whether or not he was a police official, if it was in connection with any of these, he could be so charged. |