this assistance will be wasted effort if it fails to arouse, to stimulate, local community action and personal enterprise by the citizens of Appalachia.

To achieve the greatest possible citizen participation in the effort of each local community to develop its physical and human resources, we urge an additional and vitally needed program, a program of leadership development.

We believe the legislation before you should include a new program to help people with leadership potential learn how they can improve their communities. Like the highly successful programs of the Cooperative Agricultural Extension Service so long conducted by the land-grant colleges, this new leadership training program could stimulate widespread citizen participation in Appalachia's towns and cities and local communities.

Leadership classes and workshops in communities and short courses on college campuses can develop broad understanding of the Appalachian regional development program. We believe the people who attend these adult education programs will acquire the knowledge and motivation necessary to get effective community action underway, using tools and assistance available under this legislation and available from other Federal, regional, State, and local sources. We view this kind of educational effort as an opportunity to develop citizen leaders— leaders who will give vitally needed drive and dynamism to the redevelopment and renewal of Appalachia.

Therefore, we urge this committee to add an authorization of $7.5 million to this legislation. The land-grant colleges of the Appalachian States should have the authority to administer this money. Although the Agricultural Extension Service program receives Federal, State, and county funds, poverty in many Appalachian counties is so severe that we urge that financing be equally shared by the Federal and State Governments. Federal funds for this purpose might well be allocated on the basis of the population which each State has in the Appalachian area.

Each land-grant college should establish an advisory committee broadly representing the public, including organized labor, to help develop the leadership training program. We believe the legislation should require consultation and cooperation among the colleges participating in the program.

Our suggestion for leadership development would involve a relatively small expenditure, but it would have a high payoff rate in terms of economic and social progress in Appalachia. Therefore, we urge you to include such a program in the legislation now before you.

Organized labor strongly endorses the inclusion in H.R. 4 of section 402 which provides for coverage of workers employed under projects assisted by Federal funds authorized under this bill by the prevailing wages provision of the DavisBacon Act, as amended, and the reorganization labor standards set forth in the Reorganization Plan No. 14 of 1950, and section 2 of the act of June 13, 1934, as amended.

This provision will prevent the programs to be carried forward under H.R. 4 from undermining labor standards in the construction industry in various localities throughout the Appalachian region.

We believe this legislation to help Appalachia should contain more adequate protections against plan piracy and "runaway" employers. The existing provision of this bill, section 224 (b), which deals with this issue, should be clarified to make sure that Federal aid will not contribute to any transfer of jobs from one area to another.

After comparing section 224 (b) of H.R. 4, the proposed Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, and section 406 of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, in the light of the legislative history of this latter provision (see p. 35 of the Senate committee report, S. Rept. 1218, 88th Cong., 2d sess.), it would appear that section 406 adequately takes care of pirating problems that could arise under the Economic Opportunity Act and that a similar provision should be included in the Appalachian bill in place of section 224(b). We suggest the following language:

"(b) No financial assistance should be authorized under this Act (1) in relocating any establishment or establishments from one area to another; (2) in financing plants, machinery, or other industrial facilities or to enable plant subcontractors to undertake work theretofore performed in another area by other subcontractors or contractors; (3) to finance facilities for the generation, transmission, or distribution of electric energy; (4) to finance facilities for the production, transmission, or distribution of gas (natural, manufactured, or mixed)."

The AFL-CIO cannot too strongly emphasize the necessity of now writing this language into the act. The Senate-passed bill, S. 3, contains this provision. We also strongly endorse the action of the Senate in raising from $21,500,000 to $36,500,000 the authorization of funds for restoration of mining areas damaged by harmful strip- and surface-mining practices.

There are millions of acres of land which have been devastated by private strip-mining operations in the past-1 million acres in Pennsylvania alone. Whole communities and their citizens have been left in a desert of stagnation, polluted streams, deserted forests, eroding hillsides, and vanishing hope for a better life.

Therefore, the AFL-CIO recommends that section 205 (a) specifically include authorization for Federal aid to States in Appalachia for restoration and rehabilitation of lands damaged by strip- and surface-mining operations, in addition to authorizing Federal financial contributions to these States for sealing abandoned mines, extinguishing fires, and fostering fish and wildlife resource development.

However, we believe that any such aid to a State to restore land damaged by strip mining should be contingent on the existence of a State law which requires mining operators to rehabilitate at their own expense the land which has been damaged. Only States which meet this requirement with adequate laws and regulations to safeguard the public interest should receive Federal funds for mining area restoration.

This is by no means an unreasonable proposal. Already, of the nine Appalachian States with extensive coal-mining operations, five States have laws on their statute books which require mining operators to restore lands which have been damaged and laid waste by strip-mining or surface-mining operations. The five States with these laws to safeguard the public interest are Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. We believe that all the States of Appalachia which benefit from Federal funds for restoration of mining areas should be required to have these protective laws in effect to regulate present and future strip- and surface-mining operations.

Programs of land restoration will contribute to control of soil erosion and water pollution. They will help revive the economic potential of many areas within the Appalachia region. Even more important, perhaps, such programs will bring to these areas new opportunities for State and local government cooperation, State and local initiative, and State and local action, essential ingredients for the success of the Appalachia program.

In conclusion, I wish to repeat that the AFL-CIO strongly supports the Appalachian Regional Development Act, with the amendments I have described. However, let us all recognize that the circumstances which have led to poverty, to blight, to social and economic lags in the depressed areas and depressed regions of this country were a long time in the making. Economic recovery inevitably will be slow. The ARA programs and this proposed Appalachia program cannot be successful unless the American economy as a whole, achieves and sustains a high rate of growth with expanding job opportunity for all American workers.

Unfortunately, persistent unemployment and poverty can continue in depressed areas and in a depressed region like Appalachia even during times of national prosperity. But without national prosperity, without an expanding economy, without new job opportunities opening up, we cannot expect even the best of aid programs for depressed areas to be successful.

Therefore, we urge this committee to act promptly on the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, as part of the overall national attack on poverty and as part of the national effort "to promote maximum employment, production, and purchasing power," as required by the Employment Act of 1946. EXCERPT FROM AFL-CIO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL STATEMENT OF NOVEMBER 24, 1964 ON "AFL-CIO LEGISLATIVE GOALS OF 1965"

REGIONAL AND RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

Experience under the Area Redevelopment Act of 1961 has demonstrated the need for a broader assault on chronic depression-an assault that embraces a region rather than a single community. The proposed Appalachia program conforms to this need and it has our support.

There should be similar programs in other areas, based upon the concept of regional planning. Financial and technical assistance by the Federal Government can obviously be more effective on this broader base.

There remains the national challenge of conservation and development of natural resources. Such areas as water supply and river development, giant grids for the interstate transmission of electric power, desalinization of sea water, the preservation and maintenance of national forests and rangelands— and these are but a few-require firm Federal initiative.

NEWS FROM THE AFL-CIO

The AFL-CIO today announced formation of an 11-State labor confederation to assist in revitalizing the economically depressed Appalachian area.

The newly formed AFL-CIO Appalachian Council will bring labor organizations in the region into a single coordinating unit to work with community groups and Federal and State Government agencies.

Its full program yet to be formulated, the council's initial goal will be to inform working men and women of the particulars in the programs currently underway in the Appalachian area and assist in developing competent leadership to carry out these and future programs.

As the central agency for labor's joint efforts, the council will work with the Department of Labor, the Area Redevelopment Administration, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Office of Economic Opportunity. The council will also work with State programs, such as those being established by the land-grant universities.

The council anticipates favorable congressional action early in 1965 on the Appalachian program and subsequent cooperation with the Appalachian Regional Commission, which is expected to be created.

Initially formed by State AFL-CIO organizations, the council will be expanded to include international unions, regional bodies, local unions, and city central organizations from which the leaders of the 21⁄2 million union members in the area can help implement the program.

Participating in the council formation were representatives of all State AFLCIO organizations in the 11-State area. Preliminary work on the council took place in October at the Appalachian Trade Union Conference in Charleston, W. Va., where the need for a regional group to weld together labor's antipoverty efforts was agreed upon.

Chairman of the council is Miles Stanley, president of the West Virginia Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, who will establish offices in Charleston. Vice chairman is Harry Boyer, president of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO and secretary-treasurer is Robert Bollard, secretary-treasurer of the Ohio AFL-CIO.

Serving on the executive committee are Sam Ezelle, executive secretarytreasurer, Kentucky AFL-CIO; Charles Della, president, Maryland State and District of Columbia AFL-CIO; and Barney Weeks, president, Alabama Labor Council, AFL-CIO.

The other board members are Sinway Young, president, South Carolina Labor Council, AFL-CIO; Matthew Lynch, president, Tennessee State Labor Council, AFL-CIO; Harold Boyd, president, Virginia State AFL-CIO; W. M. Barbee, president, North Carolina State AFL-CIO; and W. H. Montague, Sr., president, Georgia State AFL-CIO.

NEW YORK, N.Y., February 4, 1965.

Hon. ROBERT E. JONES, Chairman, Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Appalachia, House Public Works Committee, Washington, D.C.:

Patents amendment attached to S. 3, Appalachia bill, without Senate committee consideration would seriously curtail quality of research relating to subject. Several bills have been introduced in Congress on patent rights involving all Government-sponsored research and full-scale hearings are in preparation. A Presidential memorandum on the general subject also was recently implemented by Executive Office of the President. On behalf of industrial research community, strongly urge Senate amendment not be adopted to allow for full congressional hearings on this vital patents subject. Respectfully ask this be conisdered in your subcommittee deliberations. F. O. HESS,

Chairman, Patents Committee, National Association of Manufacturers.

STATEMENT OF HERBERT WALTERS, FORMER U.S. SENATOR, MORRISTOWN, TENN.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am happy to endorse S. 3, the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965.

This legislation is a result of a great deal of study at both the State and Federal level, and the special plight of this region has been established. It is an area where both human and natural resources have been abused and neglected. Its problems have been recognized but little if any affirmative action has been taken.

There can be no question that the Appalachian Act will prove to be of inestimable value to my State of Tennessee and her sister States which are part of Appalachia. This far-reaching method of economic development will assure over the coming years a faster pace of economic growth in the 49 counties which lie in the Appalachian portion of Tennessee and it will also mean a stronger and better balanced economy for the entire State. During my brief term of service as a U.S. Senator I am proud I supported the Appalachian Act of 1964. I did so because I realized the need to stimulate a more healthy economic climate in Appalachia and because I approved of the methods and programs contained in the President's proposal. President Johnson has declared his intention to lead us to a greater society than our democracy has yet known. In his inaugural address he told us: "In a land of great wealth, families must not live in hopeless poverty. In a land rich in harvest, children must not go hungry. In a land of healing miracles, neighbors must not suffer and die unattended. In a great land of learning and scholars, young people must be taught to read and write."

In Appalachia, children do go hungry and they do grow up without an education. People suffer because of the lack of medical facilities and proper care.

We must not let this region remain apart; its people-our people-merely existing on the fringes of the better life.

The 11 States, including Tennessee, involved have the will but not the means to adequately help the people of Appalachia participate in the Nation's general prosperity. The poverty of these mountain people is necessarily a matter of great concern to us all: we cannot, in good conscience, continue to close our eyes; shut it out of our minds and our hearts; and wish it away. The legislation this committee is considering will help the people of Appalachia mine their great resources which lie not only in the coalfields but in their children; in their beautiful mountains and forests; and in their independent spirit. In this connection, it is imperative we make it abundantly clear that the funds to be expended are in no sense a handout. They are tools to build and provide incentives which will overcome the inertial of rest which has stagnated the Appalachian region.

The $840 million for highway construction, provided in this bill, is basic to solving the problem of isolation in this rugged land. These development roads would link Appalachian communities with each other and the outside world; tourism and new business enterprise would be encouraged; and schools would be helped to consolidate.

The new roads would be supplemented by the land and water development provided in the bill. Areas damaged by mining activities would be restored. Measures would be taken to control floods and clean up streams which have been polluted.

The people of Appalachia would be helped not only by the aid provided to improve their own physical environment but also by measures to improve their own physical health. Demonstration health facilities would be constructed with the aid of special grants. These hospitals and treatment centers would help remedy the health and nutritional deficiencies so prevalent in the region. As important as these features are, there are still other reasons which show the Appalachian Act to be the right approach to the problems of Appalachia and, especially, the problems of Tennessee. I refer to the framework which the bill establishes; for regional programs have application to Appalachia. The regional approach, as set up by this act, will be far more effective in implementing the program than if each State were to work by itself. The State of Tennessee has had only the finest experiences in regionalism during the past several years as it has worked with other Appalachian States in helping to bring about this program. Furthermore, the valuable work and experience of the benefits of the Appalachian Act is in as comprehensive a manner as possibl

I am, therefore, pleased to add my support once again to this vital legislation which will strengthen not only the Appalachian region but the national economy as well. Its successful enactment and implementation will contribute to the productivity and development of a valuable region and the people who live there.

I want to urge your most expeditious and favorable action on this bill.

STATEMENT OF JACOB CLAYMAN, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, INDUSTRIAL UNION

DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO

Mr. Chairman, my name is Jacob Clayman, administrative director, Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO. The affiliates of the Industrial Union Department includes some 6 million union members.

The Industrial Union Department wishes to urge the speedy passage of the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, largely along the lines of H.R. 4. We are in accord with the statement on this measure presented to your committee by the AFL-CIO.

The support of the labor movement for an Appalachian regional program rests on the same premises as our support for the Employment Act of 1946, the Area Redevelopment Act, and other legislation aimed at the full utilization of our economic potential as contrasted to the waste and stagnation which continue to exist in the absence of wise public policy and action.

We feel that this measure may mark the opening of a new frontier of social action and planning; providing a new type of public agency for grappling with the particular problems of Appalachia; and, subsequently, other regions.

We are convinced that the creation of a good, decent, Great Society, including the elimination of poverty, is impossible unless we can increase the output of our economy and direct a large portion of that increased output into public programs, special and ordinary. So we are highly conscious, as indeed you must be, that the most promising program of regional planning and development can achieve only limited progress in the face of a continuing high level of unemployment in the country as a whole.

In offering our firm support for H.R. 4 we wish to reiterate our oft-repeated belief that, despite the better than usual record on unemployment in the last 4 years, we must do far better. We reject the idea that a level of 4% or 5 percent unemployment is tolerable.

Nevertheless, we are also aware that even with lowered levels of unemployment nationally-indeed, if we are to achieve full employment-there are regional and local problems which call for special programs. The depth of poverty and illiteracy and the high level of unemployment in Appalachia calls for a new and special approach similar to this measure; an approach designed to apply some specific remedies already agreed upon, primarily highway construction, but also designed to provide the means for continuing studies of the region; studies which must lead to creative new action and institutions.

In endorsing H.R. 4, we do not intend to preclude consideration and passage of bills calling for regional planning and action programs for other areas but we do request that this bill be passed without crippling amendments and without being broadened so far as to jeopardize even an Appalachian beginning.

We strongly endorse the action of the Senate in raising from $21,500,000 to $36,500,000 the authorization of funds for restoration of mining areas damaged by harmful strip- and surface-mining practices. We urge that the act specifically include authorization for Federal aid to States for restoration and rehabilitation of lands gutted by strip- and surface-mining operations in addition to authorization for contributions to States for sealing abandoned mines; extinguishing fires; and fostering fish and wildlife development. No funds for restoration of stripped lands should be made available to any State which does not require mine operators to rehabilitate, at their own expense, any land being strip mined now and in the future. The Federal Government should be prepared to assist in overcoming the continuing evil consequences of past action but it should not do so until it is assured that each State will live up to its responsibility in the future. We urge the inclusion of language stipulating that the Appalachian agency shall conduct studies of the potential benefits to be secured from the coordinated use of coal and hydro in the field of electric power. We refer you to the following language of the President's Appalachian Regional Commission on this subject: "These studies should be conducted with the assistance and counsel of an advisory committee which includes representatives of private utilities, electric co