Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Mr. EGAN. I certainly will, sir.

(The information referred to is as follows:)

MEMBERS OF THE YONKERS HOUSING AUTHORITY

The members of the municipal housing authority for the city of Yonkers are appointed by the mayor. The present members are as follows: Salvatore S. Faranda, chairman; Rev. J. Clinton Hoggard, vice chairman; William A. Schlobohm; Edward J. Freeman; Robert C. Saunders.

Mr. GWINN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOGGS. No; I am sorry.

Now, Mr. Egan, do you have any information, or has it been brought to your attention, as to whether or not the Governor of New York, Governor Dewey, supports this program!

Mr. EGAN. I do not have any specific information. His policy, I think, is to support this program.

Mr. MULTER. Will you yield?

Mr. BOGGS. No.

Did not notice the Senate vote last Wednesday, a week ago, I think it was? Senator Ives, of New York, voted for the publichousing provisions of this legislation, did he not?

Mr. EGAN. That is correct.

Mr. BocGs. And, of course, Senator Wagner, of New York, is one of the authors of this legislation.

Mr. EGAN. That is right.

Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Chairman, I should like to supply for the record information gathered by the joint committee showing almost unanimous agreement on the part of the governors of all the States of the United States in support of this provision of this legislation.

I should also like to supply for the record, from the committee hearings of the Joint Committee on Housing, the statement as to why the mayors of the principal cities of this country-as to why practically every one of them-supported this program.

Mr. Chairman, I should also like to supply for the record-and I should like to request it from the Federal Housing Administration— a complete statement of the Federal Housing Administration insurance provisions, showing the Government liability in the event of default.

(The information above referred to appears on pp. 59-101.)

Mr. BOGGS. In the legislation now being considered, are there not very definite limitations or restrictions written into it as to the amount of income that a prospective tenant may have in order to qualify for occupancy?

Mr. EGAN. It is not written into this bill, to my knowledge. I have not seen it.

Mr. BOGGS. Well, let us put it this way: Is there not a limitation in the legislation which provides that he must have an income of 20 percent less than an adequate income to assure him private housing?

Mr. EGAN. Yes. It is put in a little different way, although it has the same effect since the income and rents are in the ratio of 5 and 6 to 1.

Mr. Boggs. Now, the Public Housing Act was enacted in what year! Mr. EGAN. It was enacted in 1937.

Mr. Boggs. So that it has been in effect now for 11 years.

Mr. EGAN. That is correct. Not quite 11 years.

Mr. BOGGS. The same arguments that are being advanced here today, were they not advanced in 1937?

Mr. EGAN. To my knowledge, they were, Mr. Congressman. I did not participate, however, in the program at that time.

Mr. BOGGS. In your opinion, do you see any evidence of folly or great hardship which has resulted to the real estate people or the savings and loan people, or to the mortgage bankers, or any segment of our society connected with the private housing industry as a consequence of the operation of this program over 11 years?

Mr. EGAN. No, sir.

Mr. BOGGS. In view of the fact that it has been in operation for 11 years, do you consider it new, novel, or radical?

Mr. EGAN. No, I think it is an extension of a program that was established 11 years ago.

Mr. BOGGS. Practically all of the veterans' organizations, I am informed, endorse this bill. I am informed that the American Legion endorsed this bill yesterday. The Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Disabled American Veterans, the National Catholic Welfare Congress, the Jewish Welfare Council, and the Federal Council of Protestant Churches are all supporting it, are they not?

Mr. EGAN. I think so.

Mr. BOGGS. Do you think those organizations are radical or socialistic?

Mr. EGAN. I certainly do not, sir.

Mr. BOGGS. That is all.

Mr. GAMBLE. We will recess until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock, when you will return, Mr. Egan.

Mr. EGAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. GAMBLE. The committee will now stand in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 12: 30 p. m., the committee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a. m. Thursday, May 6, 1948.)

GENERAL HOUSING

THURSDAY, MAY 6, 1948

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY,

Washington, D. C. The committee reconvened at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, Hon. Frederick C. Smith presiding.

Present: Messrs. Wolcott, Gamble, Smith, Kunkel, Talle, Sundstrom, McMillen, Kilburn, Buffett, Cole, Hull, Banta, Nicholson, Brown, Monroney, Folger, Riley, Buchanan, Boggs, and Multer. Mr. SMITH. The committee will come to order.

We will resume hearings on S. 866 and related bills.

This morning we are to hear Mr. Brannan as our first witness. Mr. Brannan, will you state your name, your position, and also give the committee your background?

Mr. BRANNAN. Mr. Chairman, my name is Charles F. Brannan. I am the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture.

Do I understand that you want the detail of my employment, or of the character of my work in the Department, or just what?

Mr. SMITH. How long have you been with the Department of Agriculture and what was your work previous to that?

Mr. BRANNAN. I have been with the Department of Agriculture since 1935. At least in the sense that the agency I joined first, the Resettlement Administration, later became a part of the Department of Agriculture.

The character of my employment by the Department in the early stages, and until just a few years ago, was of a legal character. Since then I have occupied various administrative positions throughout the Department.

Prior to that time I was a lawyer in Denver.

Mr. SMITH. How long were you with the Resettlement Administration?

Mr. BRANNAN. Mr. Chairman, I do not know whether my memory will serve me down to the detail, but approximately from 1935 until the Resettlement Administration was taken in by the Department of Agriculture in 1937.

Mr. SMITH. You were not always with the Resettlement Administration? That is, during the time when it was taken over by the Department of Agriculture, were you with it?

Mr. BRANNAN. Yes, sir; as a lawyer.

Mr. SMITH. Throughout its life?

Mr. BRANNAN. Yes.

Mr. SMITH. Were you brought up on a farm, Mr. Brannan?

Mr. BRANNAN. No, sir.

Mr. SMITH. You may proceed in whatever manner you choose, Mr. Brannan.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES F. BRANNAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE

Mr. BRANNAN. Mr. Chairman, I have a prepared statement of which you have a copy before you. It does express the point of view of the Department as it has been expressed several times to the Congress, more particularly before committees of the Senate. I will be guided by the chairman's wishes as to whether or not the statement should be read or placed in the record.

Mr. SMITH. That is entirely up to the witness.
Mr. BRANNAN. I shall read it, sir.

The Department of Agriculture is greatly interested in the development of adequate rural housing and in making available to all the farmers of this country the advantages of better rural living. Housing is indeed one of our most pressing domestic problems today, both rural housing and urban housing. Perhaps one of the greatest disappointments of veterans is the inability of so many of them to obtain decent housing. This is certainly true of the veterans who have gone back to farms, the portion of the veterans' group that we in agriculture know best.

Various statistical measures with which you are no doubt already familiar point up the fact that the quality of rural housing as a whole is inferior to that of urban housing. The deficiency of farm housing compared with urban housing, though not so marked as in earlier years, still is much in evidence. In April 1947, 18.9 percent of ruralfarm dwelling units were in need of major repairs as compared with 6.8 percent of urban units. Although 67.3 percent of rural-farm dwellings lacked running water, only 4.5 percent of urban dwellings lacked this facility. Only 20.1 percent of farm dwellings had private bath and flush toilet, but 83.9 percent of urban units were so equipped. About 59 percent of farm dwellings and 98 percent of urban dwellings had electric lights, whereas 83 percent of the urban housing units possessed all designated modern facilities, such as lights, running water, bath, and flush toilet, only 19 percent of farm dwellings were as well provided.

It is commonly supposed that city families live under more crowded conditions than farm families. They do lack the spacious reaches of the open country, but when people per room are counted, it is found that proportionately more farm dwellings than city dwellings are overcrowded. According to the census survey of April 1947, 9.9 percent of occupied rural-farm dwelling units had 1.51 or more persons per room. The corresponding figure for the urban places was 4.4 percent.

You may well understand our concern when a few days ago it appeared that the rural housing provisions of S. 866 might be deleted from the bill passed last week by the Senate. We were very much gratified that the bill as finally passed did not discriminate against farm people. The provisions of S. 866 concerning rural housing, if enacted into law, would give the Department of Agriculture an oppor

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »