AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE EMERGENCY CONSERVATION MEASURES The unobligated balance of the amounts made available under this head in the Third Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1957, and in the Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1958, shall remain available until expended. [House Report No. 2221 on H.R. 13450, July 18, 1958] AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE EMERGENCY CONSERVATION MEASURES During fiscal years 1957 and 1958, Congress provided $24 million for costsharing assistance to farmers for carrying out emergency conservation measures on agricultural lands made necessary by natural disasters, such funds to be available through June 30, 1958. Due to adverse weather conditions in 1957 and the early months of 1958, it has been impossible to complete many of the projects approved and initiated under this program. In order to take care of these commitments and to provide for future emergencies, House Document No. 394 proposes to continue available the unobligated balances. The Committee has included language in the bill to carry forward the unobligated balance of these funds-estimated at between $18 and $19 million. In order to obviate the necessity of extending the availability each year as emergencies arise, the Committee has made them available until expended. This action appears to be fully justified in view of the rigid restrictions surrounding the use of these funds and the careful manner in which they have been administered by the Department. The use of this money is limited to portions of the country which have been designated as disaster areas and to conservation work which is necessary to prevent serious damage to or loss of land. We are providing a more complete appropriation history for the record: This appropriation request is being handled in the same manner as the last prior supplemental for this purpose. Records indicate that the last prior supplemental was first presented to the Senate in document 54, dated September 21, 1961, and that no subsequent hearings were held by the Congress prior to enactment. Senate Document 54 included the following (new language italicized): "For an additional amount for 'Emergency conservation measures', to be used for the same purposes and subject to the same conditions as funds appropriated under this head in the Third Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1957, and the Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1958, including necessary administrative expenses, $5,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That this shall be available, in such amounts and under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, to make payments to farmers and ranchers to defer grazing in counties designated by the Secretary as counties in which such deferred grazing is needed because of severe drought damage.' The stated purpose of the proposed supplemental appropriation was to provide additional funds necessary to carry out emergency conservation measures to repair excessive drought, flood, and hurricane damage to farm and range lands. The Senate committee report 1111, dated September 22, 1961, includes the following (p. 3): "The committee recommends an additional appropriation of $3 million under this head to be utilized for emergency conservation practices in disaster areas affected by hurricane damage. The amount recommended is $2 million under the supplemental estimate in Senate Document 54. The committee believes that this amount, together with the uncommitted balance of $5 million still available will enable the Department to carry out essential emergency conservation measures. The bill H.R. 9169, as passed by the Senate, included $5 million. Although Conference Report 1272, dated September 27, 1961, indicated that this amendment was in disagreement, the $5 million was included in the bill as enacted (Public Law 87-332 approved September 30, 1961). Public Law 87-332 contains the following language: "For an additional amount for 'Emergency conservation measures' to be used for the same purposes and subject to the same conditions as funds appropriated under this head in the Third Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1957, and the Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1958, including necessary administrative expenses, $5,000,000, to remain available until expended." NEED TO SHOW EMERGENCY NATURE OF PROGRAM Senator HOLLAND. I have no objection at all to allow whatever may be needed, but I do think in making a showing in a hearing on a deficiency bill, that where an item is not strictly a deficiency item you should make a clear showing of that fact, especially when it has not been heard by the other body, and we are going to have to depend entirely on this hearing for any justification of funds that may be provided. Senator PASTORE. Do you have a continuing authorization on this? Does it have to go to a legislative committee? Mr. GODFREY. No, sir. It is authorized under section 8 of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, Public Law 46, 74th Congress, as amended. AGRICULTURAL ITEMS UNDER CONSIDERATION Senator HOLLAND. I am sure every member of the committee would want emergency needs of this kind to be met. But the thing I am calling attention to is that you have two separate items, one of which has been passed on by the House and which is strictly a deficiency item and which I think you have well justified as a deficiency measure to be expended by the end of the year. Now you have a completely different kind of item and I do not think you have made a distinction showing that this is a different item. I think this is more critical, because it has not been heard by the other body, and it is going to have to depend in conference entirely on what you show here. What I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, is that the Department be asked to show more clearly the nature of this item, that the funds will be available over into the next year, if required, if that is the case, and that the basic legislature so authorized. PRIOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR ACTIVITY Senator PASTORE. Has money ever been appropriated for this purpose before? Mr. GODFREY. Yes, sir. Senator PASTORE. Did you have money in the fiscal year 1963? Senator PASTORE. When did that money run out? Mr. GODFREY. The last appropriation we had was 1962 fiscal year, I believe. Senator HOLLAND. This is a supplemental rather than a deficiency. Senator PASTORE. How could you strengthen that? Mr. GODFREY. We can point out the past history on it. Senator PASTORE. You have to show, for the record, how you have used the money that you had, when you ran out of money, the projects that are pending, and why they are pending, and how serious they are, why you need the money now and cannot wait for the regular appropriation bill for the reasons you have pointed out. I think you can do that in 5 minutes. Mr. GODFREY. Yes, sir; we can do that. Senator PASTORE. All right; go ahead and do it. Senator YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, I think the simplest way would be to explain the form of appropriation we had for this purpose, the kind of work you did, what you plan to do under this program. Is that not what you are trying to get at, Mr. Chairman? Senator PASTORE. Yes; that is right. Mr. BEACH. This, essentially, Senator Young, is in the part of the statement that was skipped. Senator PASTORE. I think the question I asked you ought to be explored. When was the last amount appropriated; how much was it; what did you do when it did run out; when did it run out; and why do you need this money now; and what are the projects pending? Mr. BEACH. The last appropriation was for the fiscal year 1962. It was a supplemental appropriation of $5 million. We had a carryover at the end of the fiscal year 1963 of about $3,200,000. Senator YOUNG. And that was handled under a supplemental bill? CARRYOVER AND RECAPTURE OF FUNDS Mr. BEACH. Under a supplemental, but in a bill which also included items of a deficiency character. We had some allocations which we are recapturing which will build the balance up to approximately $5 million. That, and the total as requested in this supplemental, makes about $17 million, and that is just about the total amount of the requirements that we now have for assistance both for the flood and the drought areas. Senator YOUNG. You have carried over $7 million? Mr. BEACH. About $5 million, including that which we have recaptured from allocations made on previous programs. In the general statement, Senator Young, there is a history of the past use of these funds beginning on page 4. It started in 1952 and has been used for duststorms in the Great Plains area, for hurricane damage in the New England area, floods in other areas, including the Midwest, and windstorm damage. It is subject to a completely unpredictable requirement because no one can predict the nature or timing of a disaster that may occur. The particular problem that we are now facing is the Ohio River flood and the drought. FARMERS SHARES IN COSTS Senator YOUNG. I think you should point out how the farmers share in this cost. Mr. Cox. They do have to share in the cost, Senator Young. And this is one of the problems we face in administrating this program. In other words, we can figure out how much money will be necessary to take care of a problem, but if it is on a cost-sharing basisSenator YoUNG. On what ratio? Mr. Cox. Between 50 and 80. Senator YOUNG. An 80-percent matching? Mr. Cox. That is, up to 80 percent of the cost. Mr. Cox. Some as low as 50 percent. For this reason, you usually have to allocate more funds for a project than required to be sure that you can take care of the farmers who are suffering from drought and flood. For this reason we need a little more in the allocation than is actually spent in a given situation. Senator YOUNG. This will give you a total of $17 million? Mr. Cox. Yes, sir. Mr. BEACH. We can put in that statement, Senator Young, showing by States the estimate of needs. EXPENDITURES STATISTICS 1960-65 Senator YOUNG. All right; will you do that? How much have you spent in any one year previously to that? Mr. GODFREY. We would like to put in the record a chart covering the period from 1960 to 1964, showing what has been spent or allocated by program and the number of counties by States. Senator YOUNG. How much was spent? Mr. GODFREY. The highest amount that has been spent in recent years was on the 1961 program. Approximately $9 million was spent in 210 counties in the United States. On the 1962 program $2,100,000 was spent, and on the 1963 program the amount allocated was $4,400,000. So far this year, we have allocated $905,000 for 26 counties in 6 States. We have requests for assistance pending now from eight States for which commitments have been tentatively made for $5,437,000 which would exhaust practically everything we have left. We have requests pending from 17 States, 794 counties, which will require $17 million. This includes the $5 million that I pointed out had been tentatively committed. Senator YOUNG. Are you putting this in the record? Mr. GODFREY. Yes, sir; we will be glad to insert this in the record. Senator YOUNG. That will be made a part of the record. (The charts referred to follow:) |