However, I am equally as conscious that there are areas in other States where the need is critical, and if it is to be alleviated bold, positive, and imaginative action must be taken. The southwesern part of Virginia is inhabited by an alert, intelligent, and ambitious people. It is rich in natural resources and has as great a potential for industrial development as any area in the United States. Its mountains, streams, and forests are among the most beautiful in the world. It should be a mecca for tourists. An acceleration of the construction of Virginia's arterial highway system, an improvement in existing educational facilities, the prompt inauguration of vocational and technical training, adequate public health facilities, together with a realistic public works program, will provide the necessary stimuli, and result in full development of the Appalachian region in Virginia. The success of the programs envisioned by the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 depends upon their administration, and the extent to which they are coordinated with and supplement existing programs that are already in effect in the various States that constitute the Appalachian area. There is little that this bill envisions that is not already being undertaken by existing agencies of the Commonwealth of Virginia. If the work of these agencies, and the programs now underway, can be augmented and hastened to conclusion, we feel very strongly that the problems of our Appalachian area will be solved. Again, I express my appreciation for this opportunity to present these views. Hon. ROBERT E. JONES, STATE OF GEORGIA, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, Atlanta, January 29, 1965. Chairman, Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Appalachia, DEAR CONGRESSMAN JONES: Because of the pressure of State business in connection with the current session of the State legislature, I must regretfully decline your kind invitation to testify before the subcommittee in behalf of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. I am strongly in favor of the passage of this bill, and as you have suggested, am submitting the enclosed statement for the subcommittee's consideration. Thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to present my views. If I can be of any further service to the subcommittee, please call upon me at once. With best regards, I am, CARL E. SANDERS, Governor. TESTIMONY OF Gov. CARL E. SANDERS, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE CONFERENCE OF APPALACHIAN GOVERNORS Mr. Chairman and members of the ad hoc Subcommittee on Appalachia, it is my duty and my privilege, as chairman of the Conference of Appalachian Governors to submit this statement to the Subcommittee on Appalachia, and to endorse the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. I urge your favorable consideration. This bill is well designed to meet the needs of the region and to strike at the roots of poverty in Appalachia. I agree completely with the majority report of the Senate Committee on Public Works last year that this program will "in the long run eliminate much of the need for public assistance payments by development of the region's natural and human resources." I would like to point out that there has been little change in Appalachia since the original information, based on the 1960 census, was collected. The people of that region are still bound in an isolated and stagnant economy. In Georgia our 35 Appalachian counties have substantial and persistent unemployment ranging from a high of 12.3 percent to a low of 5.1 percent with an average of over 7 percent. There is a great need for better access to Appalachia. Major highways and connector roads are needed to improve accessibility for the tourist trade as well as to aid the landowners in marketing the abundant timber resources. For example, only 50 percent of Georgia timber is now being marketed. Better management of the timberlands and improved access will increase the available timber by another 30 percent. Such an improvement would enable the people of Georgia and the other Appalachian States to take advantage of the growing markets for wood products. We in Georgia have in preparation for early consideration, a timber resources survey in which we propose to diagnose the problems of the area before treatment is prescribed. We must not ignore the attitudes of the present landowners for access to the timber depends upon their attitudes as much as upon access roads. I would not support any measure which would override the wishes of the landowners and the present market operators in the area, but I am firmly convinced that through this bill under consideration we can create conditions which will stimulate the expansion of the currently profitable timber operations in the Appalachian region of Georgia. The entire Appalachian area needs improved health facilities to make the area more inviting for workers and investors. We need mineral resource studies to locate deposits for exploitation. We need to improve open land for grazing and for protection of its productive capabilities. Many areas of the Nation are in critical need of wholesome water. We now have water in abundance in the Appalachian region, but we must take steps now to protect the quality of that water. Appalachia needs improved vocational education facilities to help its residents, current and future, to increase their productivity. We in Georgia pledge to continue our present efforts in the Appalachian area, and we will expand our assistance as the opportunities arise. State initiative was behind this program now under consideration and through it, the States want to be true partners in the growth of the region. I am sure that the other Governors of the Appalachian States share my conviction that this program will become the Nation's outstanding example of local-State-Federal cooperation. I am concerned that the Senate bill under consideration does not make provision for a State representative to work full time at the regional commission headquarters, as recommended by the Systems Development Corporation and the conference of Appalachian Governor's staff. A true partnership is lacking when two full-time, highly capable Federal executives are assigned to work with 11 State representatives working most of the time in their home State. In Georgia we have found a network of area planning and development commissions to be remarkably effective. These multicounty organizations allow local communities to join together in economic surveys and to initiate their own plans for economic development. The State matches funds and provides assistance in planning. Almost Georgia has concentrated its efforts in the Appalachian counties. 65 percent of the $390,000 that Georgia has put into our 16 development commissions since 1961 has gone to the three commissions in our Appalachian area. Our budget for the next biennium allocates almost $1 million for those area development organizations. We are making, and will continue to make, strong efforts to help ourselves, but the regional problem cannot be solved until a regionwide attack is carried out. I am convinced that our Georgia program is now one of the finest examples in the country of State and local cooperation for economic development. With the passage of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 these area commissions broadened their perspective and have been invaluable in setting up programs under that act. They will be of similar assistance in carrying out the programs of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. I urge the subcommittee to take care that the human resources development program now underway under the Economic Opportunity Act be closely coordinated with the Appalachian program, for human resources development is an essential part of regional development. Our Appalachian area, which is filled with natural resources cannot benefit our Nation and mankind until we have trained men who can dedicate themselves with skill and enthusiasm to the development of those resources. The wealth of our Nation is based on the increased productivity of the individual. The nonproductive are a drain on the economy-a drain which this bill is designed to eliminate. The Appalachian program and the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 are pioneer efforts in expanding the wealth of the Nation. The entire Nation not only will benefit from the increased productivity of the Appalachian region, but also the findings of the combined programs will show us sound approaches to the further development of other regions of the country. The Appalachian and economic opportunity programs are wise investments, not wealth-consuming expenditures. They are businesslike approaches which will bring rich returns to both the present and future inhabitants of Appalachia and of the United States as a whole. I urge that this subcommittee and the Congress complete the action begun last year and pass the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. The people of Appalachia are waiting, not in idleness, but with the confidence that their current efforts will be reinforced by the determination of the whole Nation. The days of our reform have not passed and surely our affluent America can afford to eliminate the scourage of poverty from those citizens too long neglected, too long forgotten in the mountains of Appalachia. Thank you. STATEMENT BY GOV. EDWARD T. BREATHITT OF KENTUCKY Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of this committee, I am Edward T. Breathitt, Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It is a pleasure to once again have an opportunity to discuss the Appalachian Regional Development Act with Members of Congress. Last May I testified in behalf of a similar piece of legislation before the House Public Works Committee. At that time I gave a rather detailed and comprehensive endorsement of the goals that were then incorporated in the bill. Today, I want to reaffirm my original testimony and request that you give this legislation as speedy a passage as can be justified with searching deliberation and sound judgment. In a region with as much need and deprivation as Appalachia, it is almost superfluous to say that this program is more necessary now than a year ago. Unfortunately, such is the situation. This program will make possible an attack on some rather unusual problems which are peculiar to the Appalachian region and which existing programs and local capacity have not been able to solve. Among these problems is the absence of a modern transportation network. This problem can only be corrected with an imaginative, creative, developmental system of highways which will establish "new rivers of commerce" to tie the Appalachian region to the prosperous growing economy of the Nation. Better use and control of water resources is another need which local people cannot met alone. So is a means of upgrading timber resources. The chronic shortage of basic economic items such as water systems, sewer systems, and improved industrial sites is a deterrent to growth in the Appalachian area. The legislation we discuss today clearly indicates an understanding of these and other problems of Appalachia and sets a clear course for meeting these impediments to economic growth in the region. There is no need for me to dwell on the act's solutions and proposals here, since the specific requests made in this legislation were endorsed in my previous appearance before the House Public Works Committee. It is more important for me today to talk about the feature of this bill which inherently is the key to the success of the program. The act provides a device for closely coordinating State, Federal, and local efforts to focus on and solve the problems of the region. It is the establishment of the Appalachian Regional Commission, which will be a new approach not only in terms of Federal-States relationships, but also in terms of the tasks which this legislation assigns to the Commission. Certainly, Kentucky has not participated in this kind of governmental approach to problems and I believe this will be a new experience for the Federal Government as well. Unusual demands will be made not only of Kentucky and the remaining 10 States, but also of the Federal Government. A true sense of cooperation and mutual understanding between and among the members of the Commission must prevail if this program is to succeed. I am concerned that we begin now to do the very best job we possibly can to set the precedents which will insure the success of the Appalachian program if it becomes law. While it is necessary that the Commission occupy itself with utilizing comprehensive, integrated programs which in concert will develop the region, the State of Kentucky must just as surely concern itself with the same comprehensive, integrated programing, not only for that portion of Kentucky which is included in the Appalachian region, but also for the rest of the State. This is true because the impact of the Appalachian program will be great in all areas of Kentucky, and we must be doubly concerned that we establish from the very beginning the understanding and organizational structure needed to insure its best use. I can tell you today that we in Kentucky understand this new Appalachian approach to regional economic and social problems and that we are organized and prepared to use this bill. We have the machinery and the beginnings of a staff in my office ready to go to work if this legislation becomes law. Kentucky has made a maximum effort at the State level to meet the needs of Appalachia and this effort is not going to be diminished. Great attention is going to be devoted to the search for the best use of the limited resources at State and local levels and the growing arsenal of Federal resources to achieve the maximum economic growth and human development gains possible. We anticipate that the Economic Opportunity Act with its emphasis on the maximization of opportunity for those whose development has been stymied by a lack of economic development will become a part of our total programing. The Economic Opportunity Act and the bill which we consider today together will provide Kentucky, for the first time in our history, with the necessary tools to begin a human and economic development program process which will be self-sustaining in a short period of time. I am not unaware that the Appalachian program has important implications that go beyond the 11 States. In my view, the departure into this new land of Federal-States cooperation as called for in this bill, is a true demonstration of the dynamic federalism which President Lyndon Johnson has predicated as the basis for a society in which the benefits of that society accrue to all people. Others in this country who have problem areas similar to ours will no doubt draw upon the Appalachian experience. For our part in Kentucky, we are happy and pleased to continue in the 20th century a tradition of trailblazing which we set in the very early days when the first pioneers moved across the Appalachians to the West. We have played a continuing role with the other 10 States and the agencies of the Federal Government in trying to illuminate the problems of the Appalachian region and possible solutions. While it might appear that this legislation is special action to favor some at the expense of the majority, I think the Appalachian approach to regional problems will pay dividends to other parts of these United States. Perhaps most importantly, this program will remove a chronic deficit area from the Nation's ledger sheet and replace it with a growing, viable economy which will advance the greater good and economic well-being of all the people of this country. If used in a coordinated manner this program will draw the Appalachian region into the main stream of the American economy where each community and each region must find itself if it is to enjoy the fruits of this country's free enterprise system. The total outlay requested in this bill is small in my opinion compared to the possible gains to be realized. I respectfully ask you to act on this legislation as quickly as possible. Hon. ROBERT E. JONES, Chairman, Subcommittee on Appalachia, COLUMBUS, OHIо, February 3, 1965. With the full realization that certain portions of southeastern Ohio desperately need economic development, Ohio, approximately 1 year ago embarked on an Ohio Valley region program. This area coincides with that presently termed "Appalachia," plus the additional counties added in the Senate. This program was conceived prior to the time that Ohio committed itself to the Federal Appalachian program. Therefore, even though the proposed legislation for the Appalachian area was not acted upon, we have continued with our program. It is our belief, however, that the proposed legislation on Appalachia can be of significant import to the area. We are therefore hopeful that with full recognition of the States responsibility it will become law in this session. JAMES A. RHODES, STATEMENT OF CARLTON R. SICKLES, DEMOCRAT, OF MARYLAND Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support H.R. 4, which would establish the framework upon which the economically and socially deprived residents of the 10-State Appalachian region can build a new future of prosperity. It is obvious in Appalachia that fragmented efforts of individual groups and communities are inadequate to meet the massive problems that extend over the boundaries of any one government, except our National Government. Until the Appalachia program, there has been no satisfactory regional plan for development-no plan which measures the level of resources, both public and private, required for the basis of improved economic growth, no plan which can reach across State borders and into the small remote poverty pockets of 10 different States. This plan for overall economic development has the necessary ingredients for success: Investment in the people of the area to improve their schools, housing, health, and to help them acquire new job skills; investment in needed physical facilities such as roads, airports, and dams; and finally a regional organization to coordinate the efforts of Federal, State, and local officials in attacking the roots of the problems of this region. Not only would this bill benefit the Appalachian region, but it has potential significance to at least six other multistate regions. If the Appalachia bill passes and works, as I believe it will, then the program can be applied to other distressed areas which are stagnating while the rest of our economy grows stronger. It is an approach, which if successful, I should like to support in the future for combating the problems of such regions as the upper portion of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin; and Ozarks; portions of Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts; upper Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire; portions of Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona; northern California, Oregon, and Washington. There are possibly other areas besides these which could also benefit from a regional recovery program, and the success of the Appalachia program could result in aid to these areas. Thus, my support of this bill is not just the support expected from a Representative whose State will benefit from this action, but also as a Member of Congress who sees this bill as a trail from which the verdict of success could mean new lives for American in many regions. Of course, once the Appalachia bill is passed, it will be up to the people of that area to build upon the economic framework provided by the Federal programs. The Appalachia area once provided the pattern for frontier growth; now in the 20th century it must provide the pattern for new and greater economic growth in areas which have lagged behind the rest of modern America. Appalachia is also of importance to each of us because an increased economic prosperity in Appalachia will have a vital impact on the economy of the country as a whole. The construction of modern roads and modern transportation through Appalachia will provide routes for goods from the rich Ohio Valley and adjacent southern areas to the eastern seaboard, thus strengthening the economies of these regions. Secondly, as Appalachia becomes an efficient producer through development of its resources, it will also become a larger consumer of goods produced in other areas. I support this bill, therefore, not only for the well-being of the people of Appalachia, but for the potential benefit to all Americans. Mr. JONES. The committee will now adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow. (Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Friday, February 5, 1965.) |