There are too many people who want to work who don't want to draw checks, and who are willing to work if given the opportunity. We have got 80 little mainstream jobs in our area. We have three to 400 applications every time we get a new contract for these jobs, and it is difficult to make decisions as to who should get the job.

Now, if you follow the guidelines completely, you would say the man who might be trainable. Last week, we had two men apply for jobs. One was 47 years old, had an eighth grade education and the other one was 47 or 48, third grade education, 12 children in his family. The first man had no dependents. The second man had 12 children, and had been out of work for 6 months.

We gave it to the man who had 12 children in his family.

This is the basis of our selection. We use local people to help decide who needs it the most.

I don't see any other solution for problems in some of our counties except if a man is willing to work and can't find work, the Government ought to be able to furnish him with a decent job.

There is a need for development of small, local industries, such as handcrafts, and we have been involved in some of these, the bee industry, and others like it. One of the greatest, most productive small industries supplementing the income of farmers has been eliminated by the Federal Government, and I understand that even Cordell Hull's father, you know, supplemented his income through a small legal distillery. The Federal Government has destroyed much of the small industry in America.

There is great prospect and potential for the area through the proper recreational development.

Senator, that is all I want to say. I will be glad to answer any questions you want to present.

Senator NELSON. You represent what area?

Mr. INGRAM. Northern middle Tennessee, which is part of Appalachia. There are 12 counties under CAP. The largest is 30,000 in population. The smallest is 4,000.

Senator NELSON. Within the area you represent, how many people would be valid applicants for jobs in the public service employment area, whether it be Mainstream or something else?

Mr. INGRAM. Let me explain it. CAP covers six counties, and through the CEP program, it covers six more.

As I say, every time we get a new Mainstream contract, we review— that is yearly-those who are employed to be sure they are the ones who need it most. We advertise, and we take other applications. We will have anywhere from three to 400 who will apply for these 80 jobs. There are others, I am sure, who are left out, don't know about it. I would say that we could easily employ 1,000 to 1,500 people in this 12-county area if we had public service jobs.

Senator NELSON. Is there sufficient useful work to be done in the area to employ that number of people?

Mr. INGRAM. Yes, sir; our counties are poor. The per capita income in our area in 1960 was about $900, compared to $2,000 and something nationwide. It has been raised some. It is up about $1,500. It is over $3,000 across the Nation.

Your schoolhouses, courthouses, some of these were built during WPA days; there is extensive repair to be done. We have areas that

40-963 0-70-pt. 1-19

have been gutted by strip mining. There is a lot to be done there. Soil conservation-in every area there is plenty of work to be done.

I think as you mentioned in your comments earlier, no program has found more favorable acceptance than the little operation Mainstream program that we operate, and it has given these men dignity, these ex-coal miners, lumberjacks.

The mayors, the county judges, and others have publicly recognized the work we have done. It becomes difficult, if we can find a job for the man, to get him off. We have to threaten to fire him. But we place 10 to 15 percent of the people we take in under Mainstream.

Senator NELSON. You place them subsequently?

Mr. INGRAM. Yes; we place them in other jobs in private industry. Senator NELSON. Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate your coming here.

That will conclude the hearings for today.

(Whereupon, at 1:02 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned subject to the call of the Chair.)

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT,

MANPOWER, AND POVERTY OF THE

COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE,

Los Angeles, Calif.

The subcommittee met at 9:45 a.m., pursuant to notice, in the Washington Room, Los Angeles County Patriotic Hall, 1816 South Figueroa, Los Angeles, Calif.; Senator Walter E. Mondale presiding (pro tempore).

Present: Senators Mondale (presiding pro tempore) and Cranston. Committee staff present: William Spring, professional staff; John Scales, minority counsel.

Senator MONDALE. The hearing of the Subcommittee on Employment, Manpower, and Poverty will come to order.

In this hearing which we open today, Senator Gaylord Nelson, of Wisconsin, the chairman of the subcommittee, has asked me to express his regrets at not being present. Senator Nelson had plann. d to attend, but a family illness prevented it.

This hearing is the first in a series that the committee intends to conduct across this Nation in cities and rural areas.

Before the committee is the administration's proposal called the Manpower Act of 1969, a bill that would reorganize the way in wl.ica our manpower programs are administered, turning major responsibility over to State government.

The committee believes that this legislation provides an opportunity for a careful examination of the efforts the Nation has made in manpower training and employment programs since the passage of the pioneering Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962. So the committee is beginning a series of field hearings at which local officials, businessmen, labor leaders, and community people will have a chance to comment on the administration's proposed reorganization, to give the committee the benefit of their experience in evaluating the various programs and their recommendations for improvement.

The committee also wishes to ask local citizens, especially local county and municipal officials, what value they see in proposals for a national public service employment program. Are there in fact real jobs in public service at the local level that could be performed by people with low skills if Federal funding were available? We look forward especially to testimony on this point from county and city officials here today.

(281)

When testimony has been gathered from citizens and officials across the Nation, the subcommittee hopes to draft legislation for a sound national manpower policy in the 1970's and to end the situation. where we find in Watts and East Los Angeles today socially crippling rates of unemployment and underemployment.

There has been a dramatic rise in spending for manpower programs in this decade-from something on the order of $50 million a year to $2.2 billion. We are here in Los Angeles today to find out what the impact of this increase has been if any on the poverty communities of this area.

According to the Los Angeles comprehensive manpower plan for fiscal year 1971, the number of people needing services in this area is about 784,000, while a generous estimate of those being served by these programs is no more than 100,000. Clearly the programs are not adequate. What steps should be taken?

We know the effort has been far too small. But a fair question is whether or not it has worked at all. The most devastating criticism of manpower training programs is that they prove to be the kind of revolving door with cycles of training leading only back to the street and not to gainful employment. What has been the case here in Los Angeles? What is the placement record here? What seems to be working?

A number of other questions are raised by this proposed legislation. They include the proposed changes to title I-B of the Economic Opportunity Act, which has authorized a number of manpower programs including the concentrated employment program-to assure a voice in the design and operation of manpower programs for the people living in poverty communities.

The proposed Administration Manpower Act would repeal title I-B and virtually take all of these programs away from any meaningful administration by community action groups.

Also there is a key issue of the relationship between Governors and

mayors.

The proposed bill is designed to give the Governor the power to appoint prime sponsors for local manpower programs, except in cities where the mayor represents 75 percent of the population of the socalled standard metropolitan statistical area. We are interested in learning how this formula would apply to Los Angeles-and what would be the relationship between the city and the county.

We are delighted in addition to have a very distinguished member of the subcommittee with us this morning, Senator Alan Cranston, of California.

Do you want to give a speech?

Senator CRANSTON. Thank you very much.

No; I don't have a speech. I think that Senator Mondale outlined very clearly what our purposes are here today.

One point that he mentioned which I think is particularly important is that we do all we can to see to it that there is sensitivity to local community needs, desires, and aspirations and involvement in these programs so they aren't imposed from outside. Rather people in local government and people in local communities and community administration must have a full share in shaping the form of programs that then will be more acceptable and more workable because they meaningfully involve the people of the community.

Senator MONDALE. Thank you very much.

Our first witness this morning is Mr. Ernest E. Debs, chairman of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, and we are delighted, Mr. Chairman, to have you here this morning to lead off the 2 days of hearings on manpower in your community.

STATEMENT OF ERNEST E. DEBS, CHAIRMAN, LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

Mr. DEBS. Thank you, Senator Mondale and Senator Cranston. My remarks will be brief today, others from the county will cover the important points of what we are doing in Los Angeles County and have been doing with the limited funds that we have. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

It is indeed an honor and a privilege for me, as Chairman of the Los Angeles County board of supervisors, to extend a most hearty welcome to you from those of us in county government. Because we too are involved and are concerned about the subject matter before you in this hearing. My colleagues on the county governing body and I are hopeful that these hearings on manpower training problems will be helpful and informative and that they will enable you to formulate new legislative concepts in the field of manpower training which will lead to more productive ways and means of waging the war on poverty, unemployment and deprivation throughout the Nation.

There is no question but what the problems are immense and the solutions to these problems are complex. We are extremely cognizant of the fact that the ultimate elimination of the problems of poverty and unemployment will require the unified and coordinated efforts of all levels of government. With a population of over 7 million within the confines of our county and with a payroll in excess of 65,000 employees in county government, the board of supervisors of this county is fully aware of the need for effective and well-rounded programs for the training of the unskilled, and we have consistently participated in various programs designed for such training. Other witnesses from the county government scheduled to appear before you later on in these proceedings will give you testimony as to the depth of our involvement in these programs.

In welcoming your subcommittee here, I am particularly gratified that we will have the opportunity to convey to you our views on past, present, and future manpower programs. It is my understanding that this is one of the first hearings on manpower to be held in the Nation, and I want each of you to know that your presence here gives us heart to know that the county of Los Angeles is rapidly gaining recognition for its prominent role in matters affecting not only southern California, but the entire country.

I can assure you that this highly urbanized county of Los Angeles has some of the same problems, needs and frustrations as any of the metropolitan areas in any other part of the country.

In reviewing the recently proposed manpower training bills, we discovered several innovative approaches toward a solution to the complex problem of training the unskilled and placing them in jobs. We agree that they are approaches which are long overdue.