Senator SPARKMAN. Without objection, that will be done.

Senator Williams.

Senator WILLIAMS. I know that the mayor is anxious to get back to his responsibilities in New York. Does Mr. Palmer have statistics that show the number of people that commute from outside of New York City into New York City each day? And how they travel, whether by mass transit facilities or their own automobile?

Mayor LINDSAY. We will have all of those in the exhibits that will be inserted in the record, Senator Williams. I can tell you right off the top of my head that the number of wage and salary earners in New York City who live outside of New York City is half a million. Those figures I know for other reasons and purposes than we have in mind. Senator JAVITS. Mr. Chairman, I have the figure.

Senator SPARKMAN. May I ask the mayor one thing, is that the result of the cram session?

Mayor LINDSAY. This last figure?

Senator SPARKMAN. Having it right on top of your head?

Mayor LINDSAY. That last figure is a result of some more recent studies we have been doing since the cram course.

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Chairman, I have the figure that Senator Williams wants. It is 850,000 out of Manhattan every day, 10 percent enter by private automobile or taxi, 90 percent enter by various other means and some 610,000 also use the subways.

Senator WILLIAMS. We have a statistic from the city of Los Angeles that two-thirds of Greater Los Angeles is given over one way or another to the automobile and streets, freeways, and throughways and parking lots, and it seems to me that if we permit some of our commuter lines to be abandoned, New York City would become one giant parking lot too, which is rather unproductive in a sense.

Mayor LINDSAY. That is true. It is also true that New York City can suffer the same fate as Los Angeles on the automobile question if we stand still on the development of our mass transit facilities. That is how much improvement is needed. We must go forward with an additional line in the Bronx and Manhattan on the east side of Manhattan and Bronx, that is usually referred to as the Second Avenue Projection, we must go forward with additional capital facilities in Queens, Staten Island, and Brooklyn, all of which means a massive capital investment. And no city community in this country has the resources to finance by itself that kind of capital investment. That is beyond the question that your bill is all about, which is on operating deficits that every mass transit system has and we in New York City, because of our special problems, have the greatest pressure on that. Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you very much.

Senator SPARKMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, and gentle

men.

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Chairman, may I first thank Senator Magnuson and the mayor of Seattle who waived their first place on the program in favor, at my request, of Mayor Lindsay? I am very grateful to Senator Magnuson and then ask if the chairman would advise me later when he would like me to testify in support of my bill. I will come back. I want Senator Magnuson to go ahead.

Senator SPARKMAN. You are on the list for later today. We can telephone your office.

Senator JAVITS. I will get back.

Senator SPARKMAN. Let us have order. We have a schedule and must move right along.

Senator Magnuson, we certainly appreciate your waiting to let the mayor of New York catch his early plane back. We are glad to have you here. Mr. Mayor, we are glad to have you.

All right, Senator Magnuson.

STATEMENT OF WARREN G. MAGNUSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON; ACCOMPANIED BY J. D. BRAMAN, MAYOR OF SEATTLE, WASH.

Senator MAGNUSON. Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the privilege of appearing before this committee. With me is the mayor of Seattle, Mr. Braman, who will testify in these hearings on behalf of the city of Seattle and the U.S. Conference of Mayors, a sizable organization, in support of S. 3061, and other amendments to the Urban Mass Transportation Act. He will explain the need for this legislation from the standpoint of our Nation's cities-and we are speaking of all of the cities of major urban importance.

I am also appearing today in support of S. 3061, cosponsored by Senators Jackson, Tydings, Ribicoff, and myself, to amend the Urban Mass Transportation Act to authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to make matching grants to assist State and local public agencies in planning, engineering, designing, and other technical studies of proposed urban mass transportation projects and programs.

Last month the mayor of Seattle knowledgeably pointed out the need for an identical bill, introduced by Congressman Brock Adams of my State, in his testimony before the Housing Subcommittee of the House Banking and Currency Committee. Last Thursday, that subcommittee favorably reported to the full committee this bill, along with other amendments to the Urban Mass Transportation Act as a separate measure.

I urge this committee to act favorably on S. 3061, either as a separate bill or as an amendment to the administration's proposal, S. 2977, which is before you also.

A little over 3 years ago, this committee and the Commerce Committee held hearings on the various proposals designed to provide assistance for urban mass transportation. On March 28, 1963. I reported from the Commerce Committee S. 6, the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which is quite familiar to all members of this committee, and which has become the foundation for nationwide programs to provide modern mass transportation systems, both in populous metropolitan areas and in our smaller communities.

The then President Kennedy, in his transportation message of 1962, had recommended Federal assistance for mass transportation to stimulate our urban areas to organize administrative arrangements and to meet their share of the costs of a fully balanced transportation system.

Following his recommendations, the Congress made such Federal assistance contingent upon comprehensive planning on an areawide basis and required that proposed mass transportation systems be part of a unified or officially coordinated areawide transportation plan. Section 4(a) of the Urban Mass Transportation Act provides that, except for emergency relief, no Federal financial assistance shall be granted unless the Secretary finds that the facilities and equipment for which aid is sought are part of the comprehensively planned development of the urban area and are necessary for the sound, economic and desirable development of such area. This section further provides that the Secretary, on the basis of engineering studies, studies of economic feasibility, and data and equiment, shall estimate what portion, up to two-thirds of the cost of the project, is eligible for Federal assistance.

There is no authority in the Urban Mass Transportation Act, however, for the Secretary to make grants to public bodies to do these prerequisite engineering, feasibility and design studies. As a result, communities must utilize local general funds or seek funds under other Federal programs of general application to make these necessary studies. Neither local funds nor other Federal programs are able to completely fill this gap.

S. 3061 would add a new section 9 to the Urban Mass Transportation Act authorizing the Secretary of HUD to make grants to State and local public bodies and agencies thereof for the planing, engineering, and designing of urban mass transportation projects and for other technical studies to be included, or proposed to be included, in a program-completed or under active preparation-for a unified or officially coordinated urban transportation system as a part of the comprehensively planned development of the urban area.

The activities that may be assisted under S. 3061 include studies relating to management, operations, capital requirements and economic feasibility; preparation of engineering and architectural surveys, plans and specifications; and other similar or related activities preliminary to and in preparation for the construction, acquisition or improved operation of mass transportation systems, facilities and equipment.

The grants authorized under S. 3061 for planning, engineering, and designing shall be made in accordance with criteria established by the Secreatry and, as is the case with other grants under the Ubran Mass Transportation Act, call for State and local financial participation of at least one-third of the cost of carrying out the activities for which the grant is made.

S. 3061 by authorizing existing funds to be used for planning, feasibility and engineering studies will enable Federal, State, and local moneys to be more wisely utilized. No additional funds need to be authorized under this bill. I hope that my observation on that is correct. I believe this bill will save Federal and local taxpayers millions of dollars through better planning and studies before construction is undertaken.

President Johnson, in his message on transportation, said that the future of urban transportation-the safety, convenience and indeed the livelihood of its users-depends upon wide-scale, rational planning. In 1964, with the passage of the Urban Mass Transportation Act,

62-551-66-pt. 2- -10

the Congress began to provide the means to meet the long-range needs of urban travelers. In 1965, the Congress acted to revitalize and modernize our transport system by the passage of the High-Speed Ground Transportation Act, which the Senator from New York and I had a very important concern about at one time.

This measure, which I introduced and came out of the Commerce Committee, established a 3-year program of research and development and demonstrations to help bring scientific and technical talent to bear on this increasingly important area of transportation not previously subject to such intensive, continuing inquiry. Within a few months, demonstrations will begin in the northwestern corridor to provide tangible evidence of the public response to modern intercity ground transportation.

On March 2, 1966, I introduced S. 3010, President Johnson's proposal for the establishment of a Cabinet-level Department of Transportation. This proposed Department could provide the organization and the leadership at the Federal level to perform needed research into new technology and to study and recommend the guidelines for our future transportation needs.

Of course, all of us, since we have been in Congress, have seen dramatic changes take place in our transportation system. But these changes pale by comparison with those we must accomplish in the 30-odd years remaining in this century. In the year 2000, a population nearly double that of today will need a 21st century transportation system to move the travelers and goods of a new America. We must continue our search for ways to provide the comprehensive, coordinated, and planned transportation system for the needs of those urban and intercity travelers in the years to come.

Mr. Chairman, I only speak for myself, but I have informally talked with many members of the Commerce Committee, and they are in complete agreement with me, that the adoption of S. 3061, either as a separate bill or as an amendment to the administration's proposal, S. 2977, is a necessary ingredient in this future that we are going to look forward to, and in meeting the problems are going to occur in the next 25 to 30 years.

No one needs to suggest to the chairman of this committee the necessity of wise planning. And no one needs to suggest the inability of some of the urban areas to be able to coordinate this wise planning unless we can amend the bill to allow that. As a matter of fact, I would sooner have the planning money, if we had to make a choice, than some of the other money later so that we know what we are going to be doing in the future.

Thank you.

Senator SPARKMAN. Thank you, Senator Magnuson, for a very fine

statement.

Senator MAGNUSON. I realize that you have the Williams bill and the Javits bill, which is another phase of this problem, and our committee takes a deep interest in that, but we rely upon the good judgment of this committee to give us advice on that matter. But this matter of the planning and engineering to help these people we are not as big as New York out in Seattle, but we are growing fast and, as a matter of fact, the city of Seattle has a bit of a problem like

New York, because we are surrounded on both sides by water. The necessity for us to move now, and plan, to reduce to a minimum these terrific problems we are going to have in the future.

Senator SPARKMAN. You have something New York doesn't have, which is the monorail.

Senator MAGNUSON. Yes, we are using that now. But we are going to have a tremendous growth out in that area, and this is a chance for us to do some wise planning for the next 25 years.

The Senator from New York has some problems that have crept up on them over the years, that had they taken his advice when he first came to the Senate, we would have been about 10 years ahead in this planning. But we couldn't get anyone to listen to us.

Now everyone wants to do the thing that you suggested a long time ago.

Senator SPARKMAN. Of course, Senator Magnuson, you will recall Senator Williams' first bill on mass transportation, an amendment to the Housing bill, while it did not go through as a comprehensive bill the first year, it initiated the Federal program by setting up planning and experimenting on a relatively small scale.

I just want to say this, with reference to your bill, it seems to me to be a good bill. You know this subcommittee has, through the years, provided rather strong planning programs in the field of housing and community facilities. Section 701 has done a tremendous job throughout the years and offhand, it seems to me you have a very good bill.

Senator MAGNUSON. We appreciate that, and I was just going to say I hope this new merger, which was approved yesterday, will help the people in his area in some of the outside transportation.

One of the real justifications of the merger was that they would pick up these small lines that are involved in commuter transportation. I hope it will alleviate a little some of your problems.

Now, may I present the mayor of Seattle to the committee?

Senator WILLIAMS. Before we hear from the mayor, I just would like to say one or two things.

Senator SPARKMAN. May I say this before you go ahead, that I have been called to come down to the full Banking and Currency Committee in order to establish a quorum in an executive session that we are having, and Senator Williams will carry on the meetings. After all, he is our expert on the committee on mass transportation.

Mr. Mayor, I hate to have to go without hearing your testimony, but it is necessary for me to go now.

Senator MAGNUSON. The mayor and I are perfectly willing and know that you have these other duties that you must attend to. Senator SPARKMAN. Thank you very much.

Senator WILLIAMS (presiding). I just wanted to say that we made a beginning in 1961 and in 1964 we had the transit bills. I have never said this publicly-I have mentioned it privately to Senator Magnuson-there was some thought early in the beginning of mass transit that this wasn't the proper subject for this committee. It was my feeling that commuter transportation is tied inexorably to all the problems of urban-suburban change, growth and development. That is why it came here, and we would never have gotten anywhere with