Page images
PDF
EPUB

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACT

OF 1965

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1965

room

[ocr errors]

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Ad Hoc SUBCOMMITTEE ON APPALACHIA
OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,

Washington, D.C.
The ad hoc subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in
1302, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Robert E. Jones (chair-
man of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. JONES. The subcommittee will come to order.

Today marks our third day of hearings on the various proposals on Appalachia. We will receive this morning the testimony from Members of the House who have expressed great interest in the legislation.

I am told Congressman Perkins has a subcommittee meeting, so we will accommodate him.

Yesterday we placed in the record the statements of the Governors that were not in attendance. The clerk tells me there is another statement from a Governor.

Mr. McNEAL. Yes; we have an additional telegram which, with your
permission, I would like to read for the record. (Reading:]
Hon. ROBERT E. JONES,
Chairman, Ad Hoc Subcommittee:

The implementation provided through the Appalachian Regional Development Act should help Alabama to proceed at an accelerated pace with its plans and programs for a full scale development of the 33-county Appalachian region of Alabama. Envision this joint effort to be an opening step in a campaign to bring this region, rich and undeveloped resources, and the people thereof up to a higher economic level.

GEORGE C. WALLACE,

Governor of Alabama. Mr. JONES. Our first witness today will be Mr. Perkins.

а.

STATEMENT OF HON. CARL D. PERKINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY Mr. PERKINS. First, let me compliment this distinguished committee for taking up such a vital piece of legislation, in my judgment, which will mean so much for the general welfare of the country.

Mr. Chairman, the bill that I introduced goes much further than the bill pending before the committee in that the matching is quite different from the standpoint of community facilities.

173

43-521—65-12

(The prepared statement and letters follow :)

REMARKS OF CONGRESSMAN CARL D. PERKINS

Mr. Chairman, it is a great pleasure for me to appear today before this distinguished committee, which has provided the Nation with a great deal of landmark legislation. I am particularly pleased that the chairman has seen fit to initiate hearings promptly so that early attention can be given to H.R. 4 and H.R. 132, which I have introduced, as well as other similar measures dealing with the development of the Appalachian region.

There is a crisis in Appalachia which can only be met by prompt action on the enactment of legislation to initiate a program to revitalize the resources of this 11-State area which have been long neglected and bypassed by other Federal programs. Steadily declining employment in the coal and related industries, the lack of financial resources to construct roads, bridges, flood control projects, water, sewer, and other public community facilities, have created conditions which are so severe in the hardships imposed upon the inhabitants that they are unable without substantial Federal financial assistance, to undertake the types of community improvement and development projects and programs which are essential to provide a stable economy.

I want to emphasize at the outset that the funds provided in this bill are not handouts to a poor region even though the region is in desperate need. But rather, the enactment of this legislation is a profitable investment in an 11-State area of the United States with vast resources and potential and populated by 35 millions of our people.

This bill strikes at the heart of one of the chief causes of poverty in Appalachia--its isolation from the main stream of economic and social contact occasioned by the lack of major highways and extremely poor and often impassable byways. The construction of roads and highways, both developmental and access, to assure every family ready access from his home to a job, to his market, to school, and to those other centers of activity that have meaning in our modern society, command the highest priority. My only reservation concerning the highway and road construction provisions of this legislation is that the bill does not authorize a large enough investment in the construction of these roads. I emphasize the work investment because the construction of roads and highways throughout eastern Kentucky and all of Appalachia will erase its isolation and will permit natural economic forces to allow Appalachian families to enjoy the general prosperity of the Nation. In many communities in most every one of the counties that it is my privilege to serve, there are many families living on roads which are completely impassable in many months of the year.

In thousands of homes families must ford creeks on foot or on footbridges to reach their homes. The lack of ready access to public facilities such as schools, hospitals, physicians, public libraries, courthouses, markets, and similar outlets for the everyday needs of American families today is one of the major reasons for the low level of economic activity. There is little wonder that dropout rates are high when schoolbuses cannot navigate the creeks and rutted roads over which they must pass in order to reach many communities. This difficulty of communication extends not only from the family home to the marketplace, to the school, and to the county seat, but also to the larger metropolitan areas of greater commercial and industrial activity.

Appalachia, released from its isolation by the construction of modern roads and highways and other community facilities, will add greatly to the general prosperity and wealth of the Nation because it is a region containing great natural wealth. In eastern Kentucky, that portion of Appalachia which it is my privilege to represent in Congress, in addition to its coal resources and commercially significant deposits of other minerals, abounds in water resources. Four major river basins, three of which are almost totally unharnessed and untamed, now create constant flood threat, but yet could be a source of economic vitality. With the constant threat of flood, many of the available land areas suitable for commercial enterprise do not invite capital investment. The siltation and pollution of streams created by a combination of inordinate and uncontrolled rainfall combined with waste as a result of mining operations, has increased the need for a positive, constructive, and effective system of reservoirs and stream and land correction measures. In this respect, the program conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is of vital importance to the region and should be expanded and accelerated within the limits of engineering knowhow and feasibility. Those reservoirs which have been already authorized by the Congress should be built at the earliest possible date and at the same time, additional reservoirs should be quickly put in the mill in order to provide maximum flood protection and additional controlled water supply usage in order to strengthen the already widely recognized recreational potential of the area.

I am very hopeful that the bill will spur the vast construction program of other types of public works and community facilities, water systems, sewage facilities, and public parks. Of tremendous importance would be the acceleration of the construction of vocational education buildings to implement the construction authorized by the Vocational Education Act of 1963 and assure as early as possible every young person with an educational opportunity in the Appalachian area comparable to that afforded in areas of the Nation which have not been similarly bypassed by the forces of technological revolution.

Of great importance in the bill are provisions providing for the extremely small family farm to develop pastureland. There is no question but that in the more mountainous areas of Appalachia this type of program could make no contribution to the family, but in the rolling or hill areas of Appalachia, families today are barely subsisting on small acreages. Extended financial assistance to develop pasturage so that livestock could be raised, would not add surpluses to the market, but would enable many to have balanced diets who at the present time are not consumers of such farm products. I had also hoped that such provisions could provide a means whereby exploited land resources ravished by either the harvesting of timber or the extraction of minerals could be quickly changed from sources of siltation to areas which would assist in retarding the rapid runoff of water which has created so much flood damage.

Section 201 (d) of H.R. 4 of the Appalachian regional development bill empowers the States to "give special preference to the use of mineral resource materials indigenous to the Appalachian region" in construction of highways and roads authorized under the bill.

I believe the bill should not single out for preference certain products but should give preference to all products produced or manufactured in the area. I suggest a substitute provision as follows:

“In the construction of highways and roads authorized under this section, the States may give special preference to the use of materials produced or manufactured in the Appalachian region."

In concluding my brief remarks on a bill that will receive more lengthy praise and elaborate description, let me emphasize that this bill in no way overlaps or duplicates the programs envisioned under the Economic Opportunity Act which recently passed the Congress. The differences between these bills can be more quickly realized when it is understood that the Economic Opportunity Act deals with the education, training, health, financial, and other similar needs of individuals and families wherever the impoverished may be found throughout the country, whereas the Appalachian bill concerns itself primarily with the development of the physical resources of a large region having common topographical characteristics, the neglect of which, over a long period of time, aggravates and makes more chronic, poverty and social problems associated with poverty.

I urge the immediate passage of this legislation.

It would be appreciated if there could be inserted in the record following my remarks a communication from Ralph C. Pickard, director of the division of environmental health in the Kentucky Department of Health, which letter stresses the importance of section 215 of H.R. 132. This provision is extremely important in securing for Appalachian communities basic community facilities which are essential to health and development. I am hopeful that such a provision will be in the bill reported by the committee to the floor.

ASHLAND OIL & REFINING CO., INC.,

Ashland, Ky., February 2, 1965. Hon. ROBERT E. JONES, Chairman, Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Appalachia, House Committee on Public

Works, Room 501, Old House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Section 201 (d) of H.R. 4 of the Appalachian regional development bill empowers the States to "give special preference to the use of mineral resource materials indigenous to the Appalachian region” in construction of highways and roads authorized under the bill.

We believe the bill should not single out for preference certain products but should give preference to all products produced or manufactured in the area. We suggest a substitute provision as follows:

"In the construction of highways and roads authorized under this section, the States may give special preference to the use of materials produced or manufactured in the Appalachian region.”

It is apparent from the reading of the bill that certain interests have attempted unreasonably to obtain preference for their particular products. Preferential treatment should be only for the purpose of developing the Appalachian area by encouraging the use of all materials produced or manufactured locally. It is just as important to encourage local manufacturing operations. Under present conditions there may be more labor and a greater payroll involved in manufacturing than in an extractive industry.

Similarly, we believe that no special preference should be given to coal tar products which are directly competitive with asphalt manufactured from locally produced crude oil. In our large refinery, which is located in the heart of the Appalachian area, we commingle locally produced crude oil with locally produced coal liquids and crude oil brought into the area from more distant fields.

It is not practical to avoid commingling, but since the amount of asphalt and tar produced from local crude oil and coal will greatly exceed the amount to be used in the Appalachian program, the economic effect is the same as if there had been no commingling with oil from outside of the area.

The language of the bill should not be such that it could be used for the purpose of discriminating against local manufacturing operations such as ours.

Due to the small yield of coal tar from a ton of coal, and the fact that it has much greater value for purposes other than roadbuilding, the provision in the bill pertaining to the use of coal derivatives is impractical. Our refinery in the Appalachian area processes an average of 1,800 barrels a day of coal liquids, the greater part of which, however, is converted into products ranging in price from 18 to 35 cents a gallon; coal tar when used as a substitute for asphalt or when commingling with asphalt has a value of only 12 cents a gallon, the same as asphalt.

The clause pertaining to coal tar would add significantly to the cost of construction and would yield no addition to the economic development of the Appalachian area. Cordially yours,

PAUL G. BLAZER.

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY,

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

Frankfort, Ky., February 2, 1965. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: I am writing to you with respect to my deep concern with the Appalachian bill s. 3 as passed by the Senate and the companion bill in the House which I understand to be H.R. 4.

If the bill in the House is the same as S. 3 in the Senate, then it will be of no benefit to the Appalachian region of the Commonwealth of Kentucky with respect to water systems and sewer systems and will be of little benefit with respect to sewage treatment plants since there are not over three cities in the entire Appalachian region that have sewer systems and need only a sewage treatment plant.

You more than anyone else realize that it would be disastrous to pass a bill for economic recovery and for the construction of certain public works facilities and not make it possible for the remaining seats of government in the counties to be able to obtain aid for the building of a waterworks system together with a sewer system and treatment plant. If we are to invite the tourist to come to Kentucky then its seems to me that they should expect to find modern conveniences in the towns of the Appalachian region of Kentucky.

It is my sincere hope that the Appalachian bill can be amended so that some statements similar to section 215 of H.R. 132 can be included to make this bill more realistic with respect to aid to the Appalachian region of the United States.

« PreviousContinue »