"3. Increased transit riding is the only immediately available solution to traffic congestion in our cities; the alternative is likely to be traffic strangulation. "4. In the interests of every member of the community, municipalities should exert every effort, particularly enough tax concessions and traffic reforms, to make things easier for the public transit systems to operate efficiently. "COOPERATIVE EFFORT "5. The solution to transit problems calls for a cooperative effort involving a better end product, more aggressive merchandising, and much fore imaginative thinking on the part of the transit companies; greater understanding from local businessmen and present and prospective transit riders; and increased awareness of the vital importance of supporting public transportation in every way commensurate with enlightened public interest on the part of government agencies at every level." Earlier articles pointed out that transit people "are coming up with some aggressive, imaginative ideas to get people back on buses," including express service and club riding plans, cooperative merchandising, and long-range planning. Park-and-ride arrangements and fare validation programs were also mentioned. One article placed particular stress on the favorable transit operating climate in Nashville, the success of the Cleveland Transit System's postwar rapid transit program, and Philadelphia's promotion of railroad-and-bus combination riding, which the city is subsidizing. Another article commended the action of the Illinois Commerce Commission in granting the Chicago & North Western Railroad a freer hand in making service changes and raising fares, with the ultimate objective of increased operating efficiency and better and speedier rides for commuters. Some typical passages from the series follow: More super highways are not the solution to the problem in our cities. Nowhere was this better illustrated than on the New Jersey Turnpike. In its first year of operation, it developed twice the traffic originally forecast and actually intensified rather than alleviated the traffic jams leading into New York City. *** From all sides, a growing chorus is calling on public transportation to provide the solution. But for public transit to be effective, people must ride it. And they aren't. **** Today, in its period of greatest crisis, there is appearing a resurgence in public transportation. Some enlightened public officials and transit industry bigwigs are finally doing some imaginative and constructive thinking, and the results are going to be rewarding for every individual who finds it necessary to move about in a city. ** * More and more cities, recognizing finally that they must have a healthy transportation system to survive, are taking a long, objective look at the whole transit problem. Two examples are found on the west coast, where Los Angeles and San Francisco are trying to set up an equitable mechanism to coordinate and establish an effective public transportation system. "*** City officials are making all sorts of concessions to transit companies, including tax relief and traffic laws to speed up bus operation. The Federal Government, too, is casting a benevolent eye toward public transportation. And even transit's chief competitors, the automobile manufacturers, are feeling kindly toward their former adversaries; this feeling isn't entirely philanthropic, but has grown from the realization that unless something is done to alleviate traffic congestion, automobile sales will eventually suffer." Source: Passenger Transport, Mar. 13, 1959, pp. 1 and 8. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Anything further, Mr. Dent? Mr. DENT. No, I don't have anything further. I think I understand their picture. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Pucinski, do you have any further questions? Mr. PUCINSKI. Well, Mr. Elliott, I think you make a Mr. ELLIOTT. If I may, just a moment. Walter thinks that I had better make this point clear, and I point out here in part but in the interest of time, we respectfully call your attention to our testimony before this committee, in the 2d session of the 86th Congress, appearing on pages 978 through 989 of the hearing record on minimum wage and hour legislation. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Pucinski? Mr. PUCINSKI. Well, Mr. Elliott, I merely want to thank you for joining with us today in discussing this problem, and frankly, I hope that we will be able to get more information. I think you make a good point on page 2 of your statement, in which you lament the fact that overtime coverage is excluded to transit employees, and this, of course, is merely one of the problems. My own feeling is that the whole transit industry in this country really needs a big shot in the arm. When we talk about the economy, and we talk about what effect a tax cut is going to have on the economy, we talk about various other things, and yet, day in and day out, throughout this country, in small cities and large cities, if we were to compute the man-hours lost every day in travel to and from work by millions of Americans, and compute those in terms of costs of dollars and cents, we would find that this is a really serious problem. I think that your statement here today merely emphasizes that we have been treating the whole transit industry as a stepchild in this country. I think that some effort should be made to recognize that moving people is really a big problem in America, and we have really never addressed ourselves to this problem in any significant way. Your testimony today merely points up one aspect of this problem, and a very valid aspect. I want to thank you for that. Mr. ELLIOTT. Thank you very much. Mr. DENT. Mr. Elliott, isn't it true that the big shot in the arm would be if some of the rules and regulations pertaining to mass transportation were enforced in some of the States on so-called car hops and work hops, and your making work trips to an industry, and the first thing you know, why somebody has a station wagon, and he is making two trips, one on each shift, and you get enough of those people there, the first thing you know, you take off your bus, or you are hauling empty all the way up and down the line. Isn't that true? Mr. ELLIOTT. Oh, yes. Mr. DENT. Our State does not allow it, but yet they cannot get the PUC to enforce it, under any conditions. It affects a lot more voters, you know. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Chairman. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Could we let Mr. Bell proceed? Mr. PUCINSKI. Surely. Mr. BELL. I just have one question, Mr. Elliott. You said that most of this problem exists for you in the right-to-work States. Does this problem exist in any other States besides? Mr. ELLIOTT. Oh, yes. Mr. BELL. It does. Mr. ELLIOTT. Yes. Mr. BELL. And I understand most of that is in the Deep South, or the Southern States? Mr. ELLIOTT. Not necessarily. It would seem that way, but we have it any place where there is a small community, where, you know, socalled small towns. It is very difficult. They still have long hours, 54 hours a week and longer, and still trying to lengthen them. Mr. BELL. But you do have it in States that are not right-to-work States, too, as well. Mr. ELLIOTT. Oh, yes. Mr. BELL. What other States are they, do you know? Can you say offhand? Mr. ELLIOTT. I could not specifically name them, but I know that it is in such States as, let's say, Pennsylvania, and States like New York. I would not know of any particular State that I would say as an exception. Mr. BELL. Would you tell the committee what type of people or are these little transit companies, small transit companies, or are they owned by large organizations, or how are they operated? Mr. ELLIOTT. Well, they are small transit companies, but the ownership is something else again. In the main they are large chains, as we would call them. Mr. BELL. In other words, this possibly could be large chains that own these transit companies. Mr. ELLIOTT. Oh, yes. Mr. BELL. That really operate under different corporations or different companies. Is that the idea? Mr. ELLIOTT. That is correct. Mr. BELL. I see. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Pucinski? Mr. PUCINSKI. Well, I think that Mr. Elliott would probably agree that, continuing what we said earlier, several years ago we appropriated a $50 billion national defense highways system program, and perhaps we now ought to see if there isn't some way we can help the cities of America with some good program to help all of them develop transit systems. I am aware of your fears which are valid, but I am sure that reasonable people can find some reasonable solutions to your perfectly valid fears. The fact is that 78 percent of this country today lives in urban areas, and for the most part, the public transportation systems are absolutely incredible for modern America. It is just unbelievable that people would have to travel to and from work in the kind of equipment and the kind of services that we provide in so many areas of America. I don't say this about Chicago, because you know the Chicago Transit Authority is the finest mass transportation system in the world. And I don't say this because I come from Chicago, but it is a matter of fact. Mr. ELLIOTT. That is right. Mr. PUCINSKI. It would certainly be my hope that we could find some way to give this kind of transportation to every community in the country. Mr. ELLIOTT. It would be our hope. We would be very pleased if this were possible. Mr. PUCINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Ellottt. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Elliott, thanks to both of you for your help to the committee. We appreciate it very much, and anticipating receiving the information referred to earlier? Mr. ELLIOTT. Thank you. Mr. ROOSEVELT. We will stand adjourned until 9:45 a.m., tomorrow morning in room 429. (Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m. the committee adjourned, to reconvene at 9:45 a.m., March 6, 1964.) MINIMUM WAGE-HOUR LEGISLATION FRIDAY, MARCH 6, 1964 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, GENERAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON LABOR OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:05 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 429, Cannon Building, Hon. James Roosevelt (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Roosevelt, Hawkins, Ayres, and Martin. Present also: John Schuyler, counsel; Donald Anderson, assistant counsel for full committee; Ray Rogers, minority counsel for labor; and Adrienne Fields, clerk. Mr. ROOSEVELT. The subcommittee will come to order, please. The committee this morning has a number of distinguished representatives from the lumber industry, and many of our witnesses this morning are accompanied by Members of Congress who generally represent their areas. The Chair is going to read off the names of the witnesses, and we have divided them into two panels in order to try to hear as many as possible, and then I am going to ask the distinguished Members of Congress who are present whether they wouldn't introduce their members, in no particular order, if I may. I think probably it would be better if I just called on the distinguished Members of Congress who are here, and Congressman Clark Thompson, I don't know whether you are the senior, but I think we will call on you first. Mr. THOMPSON. Perhaps I am the most distinguished one here, Mr. Chairman. In the absence of testimony to the contrary, I will assume that. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Right. STATEMENT OF HON. CLARK W. THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I am representing not particularly my own area, because I don't have any lumber, but I am representing particularly the area that I used to represent, the east Texas area. am speaking for the present representative of that district, Mr. John Dowdy, who is necessarily absent, and the representative of the second district, Mr. Jack Brooks, who is also necessarily absent. I have a great deal of feeling for the lumber business. I was raised in it, out on the west coast. I know the problems, many of them, of the east Texas lumbermen. I know particularly the one which they will present to you for your consideration this morning. I would like to have the pleasure of introducing those two who will speak for our people, Mr. Steve Kardell, who is the president of the Texas Forestry Association, and Mr. E. R. Wagoner, the executive secretary. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, I commend them to you. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Thank you, very much, Congressman Thompson, and gentlemen, we are very happy to have you, especially under such distinguished auspices as you have just been introduced to us. If I may, I will next ask Congressman John Bell Williams if he won't introduce the gentlemen who are here today from his area. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BELL WILLIAMS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI Mr. WILLIAMS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have two of my very good friends from the State of Mississippi here, Mr. Billy Hickman, from my district at Brookhaven, and Mr. James Thrash, from Laurel, Miss. Both of these gentlemen are small forestry farmers. They have a very small timber operation. They are little businessmen, in what we consider in Mississippi, one of our major industries, forestry. The legislation which is presently in consideration before your committee will have a tremendous impact upon the industry that these men represent, and I won't try to present their testimony for them, except to tell you that I am very happy to introduce Mr. Hickman, from Brookhaven, and Mr. Thrash, from Laurel, Miss., and also, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of our good friend, Mr. Bob Sikes from the State of Florida, who is unavoidably absent this morning, I would like to introduce Mr. Elmer Dyal, another small landowner, and forest products dealer. Mr. Dyal is ex-State forester of the State of Georgia, now living in Florida, and he lives and operates in the slash pine belt of north Florida and south Georgia. I am very happy to introduce Mr. Dyal to this committee. Mr. Chairman, thank you, very much. Mr. ROOSEVELT. Thank you, very much, Congressman John Bell Williams. We are happy to have you, and very happy to know that we are going to hear from these distinguished gentlemen today. Is Congressman Hagan here? FROM THE FLOOR. Mr. Hagan will be here a little later, Mr. Roosevelt. Mr. ROOSEVELT. We will postpone that. That is in the second panel, so we will wait awhile. I would, at this time, like to recognize my very good friend and colleague, Congressman Phil Landrum who is a member of the full committee, and who has had such long experience in this area. In fact, he broke me in to the whole problem of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and we are very happy to have him here today. I believe he has some friends, too, who he would like to introduce to the committee. Mr. LANDRUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I broke you in, you seem to have broken me out. [Laughter.] We are delighted to have such warm friends with whom to work, and such I may say, able friends. Since Mr. Roosevelt has assumed the chairmanship of this Fair Labor Standards Subcommittee, I think he |