Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. BULWINKLE. Here is what the lawyer can do; here is what he is for; is to start off by giving a basis for us to use. The committee has not met to decide what we are going to do about any amendments yet. There have only been about four of us out of the total subcommittee here. So, after the studies of the lawyers-Mr. Willcox, and you, and the others they will furnish us with a copy of the amendments that you think are necessary, as you think it should be, and we can amend those, or do anything we please with them; but it gives us a basis to work on.

Mr. BROWN. As I understand, Mr. Chairman, those particular matters mentioned by Dr. Parran were several subjects we requested information on at the time.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Yes.

Mr. BROWN. And were put over for further study and consideration and it was suggested that Dr. Parran and the attorneys go further into those matters, and to come in with their ideas so that we may have their advice and the benefit of their knowledge in finally reaching a decision; but I do not think any of those particular problems are so difficult but what they could be worked out.

Mr. PRIEST. There were some differences of opinion, and, as Mr. Brown has suggested, some questions, as to whether it was exactly in the language and made the provisions that were desired.

Mr. BROWN. I do not think there is any question but what we all want to accomplish the same thing. We want to be certain that we do protect the proper rights of individuals.

Mr. BULWINKLE. I am sorry that we did not have Mr. Calhoun down here today, but I thought you would probably take longer, probably all morning, and that is the reason I did not ask him to be here.

Mr. WILLCOX. Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation to the committee for the patience with which they have listened to the long presentation I have made on this matter.

Mr. BULWINKLE. We are going to express our appreciation to you after we get through with this.

Mr. PRIEST. Personally, I would like to express my appreciation of your thoroughness in the matter. I think you have been very thorough in giving all of these proposed changes and we appreciate your patience also.

Mr. WILLCOX. Thank you, sir.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Gentlemen, if there is nothing else this morning, the committee will stand adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Thereupon, at 10:45 a. m., the committee adjourned to meet at 10 a. m. the following morning, Friday, March 10, 1944.)

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE CODE

FRIDAY, MARCH 10, 1944

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON
INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in the hearing room of the committee, New House Office Building, Hon. Alfred L. Bulwinkle, presiding.

Mr. BULWINKLE. The committee will come to order.

I will insert in the record this morning a letter from Dr. C. Willard Camalier, chairman, office of the committee on war service, of the American Dental Association.

Also a letter from R. P. Fischelis, chairman of the council of the American Pharmaceutical Association.

Also a letter from Hon. Raymond E. Baldwin, Governor of the State of Connecticut, endorsing a letter from Stanley H. Osborn, commissioner of department of health, State of Connecticut. (The letters referred to are as follows:)

AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION,
Chicago, Ill., March 9, 1944.

Hon. ALFRED L. BULWINKLE,
Subcommittee on Public Health,

Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

[ocr errors]

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN BULWINKLE: Dr. Sterling V. Mead, chairman of our committee on legislation, was out of the city at the time your invitation to appear at the hearings on H. R. 3379, entitled "A bill to codify the laws relating to the Public Health Service, and for other purposes,' was received. This invitation was transmitted to me, and after reviewing the bill carefully, conferring personally with President C. Raymond Wells, Dr. Mead (by long-distance telephone), and others, I beg to state that the provisions of the bill appear quite satisfactory.

I might say, however, that the association is very hopeful that the United States Public Health Service will institute an enlarged program of dental research, to be utilized to assist the profession in solving some vitally important problems affecting the dental health of the people, with special reference to the etiology and cure of dental diseases. Plans to this end are now being considered. Sincerely yours,

C. WILLARD CAMALIER, Chairman.

AMERICAN PHARMACEUTICAL ASSOCIATION,

March 7, 1944.

Hon. CLARENCE F. LEA,

Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. LEA: The American Pharmaceutical Association has followed with interest the development of the Public Health Service and has been pleased to

note the reorganization of the administrative divisions in the interest of greater efficiency. The codification of the laws relating to the Public Health Service now proposed in H. R. 3379 is a further step in the direction of administrative efficiency which has the unqualified approval of the pharmacists of the United States as represented by this association.

We believe that the professional personnel of the Public Health Service, which includes pharmacists, is provided for satisfactorily in this bill and if enacted into law, the provisions of this measure will assure to the Public Health Service an adequate supply of competent pharmacists who will be willing to follow a career of public service in this field, even though equal competence would probably result in more remunerative employment in civilian pursuits.

It is respectfully urged that H. R. 3379 be enacted into law as now' written. Very truly yours,

Hon. CLARE BOOTH LUCE,

R. P. FISCHELIS, Chairman of the Council.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT,

EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS,

Hartford, Conn., February 28, 1944.

Congresswoman from Connecticut, Washington, D. C.:

I am enclosing herewith a copy of a letter from Stanley H. Osborn, commissioner of health, which is self-explanatory.

Now is the time for us to correct the practice of the Federal Government and all its agencies dealing directly with our cities and towns and thus circumventing the State government and its agencies which has led to duplication and endless confusion. This provision of the bill should be corrected so that the procedure outlined in Dr. Osborne's letter can be continued. When our State health authorities go to a city and find that unknown to them the Federal Government is carrying on a program there, it just creates duplication in many instances and confusion in every instance.

I hope that you can give this matter your attention.
Yours very sincerely,

The Honorable RAYMOND E. BALDWIN,

RAY BALDWIN, Governor.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT,

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
Hartford, February 25, 1944.

The Governor of Connecticut.

DEAR GOVERNOR BALDWIN: I feel I should draw your attention to a bill which I have been notified is going to be heard about March 1 before the present session of the United States Congress. The bill is H. R. 3379, a bill to codify the laws relating to the Public Health Service, and for other purposes, which in section 214 (b), page 17, reads:

"(b) Upon the request of any State, or political subdivision thereof, personnel of the Service may be detailed by the Surgeon General for the purpose of assisting such State or political subdivision in work related to the functions of the Service."

This provision allows the United States Public Health Service to go into any State, or political subdivision-town, city, or borough, to give aid or to do any work they wish, without consulting or cooperating with the State health department in any way whatsoever.

The procedure at the present time is that when the towns, cities, or boroughs of Connecticut wish aid along public-health lines, they request the assistance of this department. If, for some reason, we are unable to furnish it, this department then requests aid from the United States Public Health Service. In a like manner, if the United States Public Health Service wishes to make any study or do any research work in the State, this department is first consulted and the work done in cooperation with us. In fact, title VI of the Social Security Act relating to public-health work, section 603 (a), has the following proviso: "Provided, That no personnel of the Public Health Service shall be detailed to cooperate with the health authorities of any State except at the request of the proper authorities of such State."

Obviously, the only way this department can do its work fully and efficiently is to know everything that is going on along public-health lines in the State..

The bill should certainly not pass with this provision. This department has always worked very closely with the United States Public Health Service, and we often seek their aid, so that it does not seem possible that the bill originated from the Public Health Service.

Sincerely yours,

STANLEY H. OSBORN, Commissioner.

Dr. PARRAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have inserted in the record at this point a letter received from Dr. I. C. Riggin, president of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers. Mr. BULWINKLE. That will be done.

THE ASSOCIATION OF STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICERS,
Richmond, Va., March 1, 1944.

Dr. THOMAS PARRAN,
Surgeon General, United States Public Health Service,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR DOCTOR PARRAN: Very careful consideration and study have been given to H. R. 3379, codification of public-health laws, by the executive committee of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers, and two minor changes in this legislation have been suggested. These two changes are:

Section 214 (b). Delete "or political subdivision thereof."

Section 314 (h). Insert after word "consultation", "and agreement."

With these changes the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers is in accord and trust that H. R. 3379 will be enacted into legislation. The Association of State and Territorial Health Officers believes that the codification of the public health laws as proposed in H. R. 3379 is a forward step and is legislation that has been needed for some time. It is hoped that the Congress will act favorably on this proposed legislation.

May I say that the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers feels that this legislation is very important, and if the association can be of any assistance to the Public Health Service in this matter, we shall be glad if you will let us know.

Sincerely yours,

I. C. RIGGIN,

President, Association of State and Territorial Health Officers. STATEMENT OF CHESTER D. SWOPE, D. O., CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC RELATIONS, AMERICAN OSTEOPATHIC ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Dr. Swope, if it is agreeable with you, we will hear you at this time.

Dr. SwOPE. Mr. Chairman, I am Chester D. Swope, D. O., chairman, department of public relations, American Osteopathic Association, Washington, D. C.

I am engaged in practice as an osteopathic physician and surgeon in the District of Columbia, and am a member of the District of Columbia Board of Examiners in Medicine and Osteopathy. It is my privilege to appear here as chairman of the department of public relations of the American Osteopathic Association.

May I say at the outset that we appreciate your invitation to be here and present our views on this bill, H. R. 3379. With your permission, Dr. Otterbein Dressler, of the Philadelphia College of Osteopathy, will follow me with a brief statement.

The American Osteopathic Association and the osteopathic profession have a direct interest and responsibility in fostering the public health and we have every desire to cooperate with, and to take our place in fostering the work of, the Public Health Service. We certainly approve the policy of codifying all the laws on this subject be

cause we believe that easy accessibility and simplification of law are definite factors in bringing about a wider interest and understanding, and anything which makes it easier to deal with a Government bureau ought to be encouraged.

I should first like to comment on subsection (c) of section 215, on page 18, which reads as follows:

No regulation relating to qualifications for appointment of medical officers or employees shall give preference to any school of medicine.

[ocr errors]

The position of that provision leaves no doubt that it applies to commissioned officers, Regular and Reserve, as well as noncommissioned officers and employees. Furthermore, there can be no doubt that, taken in combination with the last sentence of section 4 of Public Law 184 of the Seventy-eighth Congress, which is the provision specifically declaring osteopathic graduates eligible for Public Health Service Reserve appointments, it is applicable to candidates from the osteopathic as well as other schools of medicine. The provision of Public Law 184, which I refer to, reads as follows:

For the duration of the present war and for six months thereafter graduates of reputable osteopathic colleges shall be eligible for appointment as Reserve officers in the Public Health Service.

This bill, H. R. 3379, antedates Public Law 184 and, therefore, it does not contain the osteopathic provision. At this point I am reminded of your statement at the outset of these hearings, Mr. Chairman, in which you indicated that the provisions of Public Law 184, so recently enacted by Congress, I believe it was approved on November 11, 1943, should be integrated into the present bill. We assume that would apply to the osteopathic provision and we are here to urge its incorporation at the proper place in the code.

I should like to say that we have been given to understand by the Public Health Service that regulations have been drawn implementing osteopathic appointments under this provision such appointments will be made as soon as the regulations have obtained legal clearance and Presidential approval, all of which are expected at an early date.

There have been other occasions where Congress has enacted laws specifically recognizing and exacting of osteopathic graduates an equialent standard of training as in the case of medical graduates. An example is the 1929 law regulating the healing art in the District of Columbia, Public Law 831, Seventieth Congress. In that law Congress set up a board in medicine and osteopathy to examine into thee qualifications of medical and osteopathic graduates for license to practice. Applicants are required to have 2 years' college preprofessional training, 4 years' professional training, and 1 year's internship in reputable medical or osteopathic institutions.

The District of Columbia law requires that the same examination be given to all candidates except that homeopathic candidates are to be examined in homeopathic medicine by the homeopathic member of the board and osteopathic candidates are to be examined in osteopathic medicine by the osteopathic member. In all other respects and in all other subjects all candidates stand the same examination. In addition, the law states, I quote:

The degrees doctor of medicine and doctor of osteopathy shall be accorded the same rights and privileges under governmental regulations.

« PreviousContinue »