calculations and build more dwellings than later are proved to be necessary for migrants only, then we turn to the resident defense workers and select them on the basis of their housing need.

Mr. THOMAS. But the defense-housing program is primarily directed to meet the need of defense workers. In other words, if a migrant came into a community on a job not connected with defense, and if there was any shortage of housing, then he would not have adequate housing.

Mr. MONSEES. That is right. The problem of the coordinator's office has been not only to avoid oversupplying a community with housing, for other reasons, but also to avoid encouraging migration into an area. Hence, where the need is clear and private enterprise will not meet it, we seek to program initially permanent or demountable residence facilities. Our first action in a community where defense activities seem to be beginning is the establishment of a homes registration office for the purpose of using what housing facilities there are in the community already.

We check our observations with the O. P. M. or the defense contractors, who may check in turn with the local manufacturers, and if an emergency seems to be developing in the housing of migrant workers-not migrants, but migrant defense workers-we then draw in the Farm Security Administration and request that they put in a modern sanitary trailer park, which stays only until our permament program of construction is completed.

That permanent program may involve demountable dwellings. Mr. THOMAS. Is your definition of "migratory defense workers" a very broad one? Do you attempt to include as many under that term as you can?

Mr. MONSEES. In making our estimates we work directly with the industries in an area, in an endeavor to find the specific number of migratory defense workers each industry will have and the total number to be provided for in that area.

Mr. KEYSERLING. It does seem that there is a need for the housing of migrant workers who do not fall within the defense program. That housing has been restricted because of lack of funds. In connection with this problem, I do not believe there would be dissent on working out a better program.

Mr. THOMAS. Then there is a gap between the slum-clearance program and the housing program for migratory defense workers, is there not?

Mr. KEYSERLING. I believe there is a program under consideration to fill such a gap, but it is not large enough.

AID TO MIGRANTS UNDER TITLE VI

Mr. MONSEES. I would like to point out that a migrant worker who seeks employment in a defense industry may be materially assisted through the facilities of the Federal Housing Administration under the new title VI. I say "may," if he has come into the community with the intention of settling and possessing the necessary down payment. In that case he may be helped under that title, because the title has no requirement as to tenant selection.

Mr. THOMAS. Have you any questions, Dr. Lamb?

Dr. LAMB. What has been said raises the question of the length of time necessary to gain admittance to the slum-clearance project. There have been many developments along that line, and I think the requirements vary considerably. For example, the settlement period in one community might be anything from overnight to 5 or 6 years. Am I correct in assuming that a reasonable requirement has been or will be established along that line?

Mr. KEYSERLING. In most projects the requirement has been about 6 months, never over a year.

Mr. MONSEES. I can say for the record, additionally, that the object of the coordinators is to house first those nonresidents engaged in defense activities who are housed beyond reasonable commuting distance from their employment.

Dr. LAMB. Provided that they are employed in an industry which has received a defense contract. Is that right?

Mr. MONSEES. If you mean a contract through O. P. M., that would not necessarily follow.

Dr. LAMB. It would not?

APPLICATION TO WORKERS ON DEFENSE SUBCONTRACTS

Mr. MONSEES. No. Take, for instance, a contractor who is manufacturing buttons for the coats of soldiers. It takes only a part of his plant's production capacity to supply the needs of that contract. Also, that contract might be quite a way down in the subletting from the primary contract which cleared O. P. M. Accordingly, each of the defense areas is having its own peculiarities, and in some of these areas the housing agencies have set up a priority system of our own, a list of priorities, to show which is the most important or essential industry where employees are in need of housing facilities. Does that answer your question?

Dr. LAMB. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to have someone here tell me, as a matter of record, how many Government agencies or departments are concerned with the housing program, and what they are.

HOUSING AGENCIES AND APPROPRIATIONS CHARTED

Mr. MONSEES. They are in a chart here [exhibiting chart]. I have the figures here broken down according to housing appropriations made in connection with the defense program. At present, there is Public Act No. 671, Seventy-sixth Congress, which empowers the U. S. H. A. to assist the Army and Navy. No funds were provided by Congress hereunder, but $32,530,987 of recaptured U. S. H. A. slum-clearance funds were made available. This act was passed prior to the appointment of the Coordinator.

Then there is Public, No. 781, Seventy-sixth Congress, which provided $100,000,000 to the President to be allocated to the Army, the Navy, and the Maritime Commission. Those funds cleared our office last fall.

Public, No. 849, Seventy-sixth Congress, which is known as the Lanham Act, is a comprehensive act authorizing public funds for defense housing under the administration of the Federal Works Agency.1

1 See Exhibit 2, p. 6955.

Public, No. 42, Seventy-seventh Congress, increased the Lanham Act authorization from $150,000,000 to $300,000,000. Then there was Public Resolution No. 106, Seventy-sixth Congress; Public, No. 25, Seventy-seventh Congress; and Public, No. 73, Seventy-seventh Congress, which all appropriated funds authorized under the Lanham Act, as amended, totaling $300,000,000, of which $10,000,000 reimbursed the President's emergency fund.

That $10,000,000 was transferred to the Defense Homes Corporation under the R. F. C.-a Corporation which develops homes and encourages private enterprise to enter and take over the property which is sold, as I said before, through this private enterprise as quickly as possible.

Public, No. 24, of the Seventy-seventh Congress, authorized title VI of the National Housing Act to encourage private financing of defense housing.

Public, No. 9, Seventy-seventh Congress, provided $5,000,000 to be allocated to the agencies of the Government to provide temporary shelter in emergency situations. This amount was increased by $15,000,000 under Public, No. 73.

The Farm Security Administration has administered all the funds allocated under that.

In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, you have a separate agency of the Navy which is prepared to do its own construction.

The Army preferred not to engage in housing construction for its needs. The Public Buildings Administration was called upon last fall to do most of the Army's housing construction under Public, No. 781.

The CHAIRMAN. Have we one of those charts to go in our record? Mr. MONSEES. I believe I brought 24 with me.

The CHAIRMAN. We want that in the record. I appreciate these copies.

Dr. LAMB. The reporter will make an exhibit of this. (The chart referred to above appears facing p. 7036.)

TESTIMONY OF CLARA M. BEYER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. THOMAS. We have not asked for a statement from the Division of Labor Standards, Department of Labor, but Mrs. Clara M. Beyer, assistant director of the Division, is here this morning. Mrs. Beyer, you have been interested in the nonresident problem, and we would like very much to hear any testimony you may care to give in connection with the problems that you have observed.

Mrs. BEYER. Unlike some of the others, we have no Federal funds to administer. We are interested primarily in seeing that the workers benefit through the funds available to the various agencies. I was interested in the points that have been made here today. It seems to me that in discussing the application of these programs, we are all talking in terms of present conditions rather than looking ahead to the problems we are going to meet in the future. It is time some adjustments were undertaken to alleviate the situation of the migrant.

The problems of migration will be with us for some time to come, and action to solve them is practically barred from every one of the programs, not by law but in performance. As a matter of fact, the problems of migratory workers are given no consideration under these programs as they are administered today, and that, I think, was brought out in the operation of W. P. A. and it was brought out in the C. C. C. Because of local administration, the migrants are inevitably slighted, and the local residents are always given the benefit.

A CENTRAL RELIEF AGENCY

It seems to us that there ought to be some central Federal agency which could be depended upon to administer relief without regard to local authorities who may have some self-interest. That is one way of getting down to the bottom of the situation. If all the certifications went through one group of agencies, or through one central agency, I think we would soon eliminate a lot of the problems of the migrants.

Mr. THOMAS. I think the point in regard to neglect of the problems of the nonresident under some of the programs is well taken. Nevertheless, is it not possible that in the very near future these same people may be helped under some program that will extend its benefits to them?

Mrs. BEYER. I think that we ought to get the laws clarified so that future migrants would not be discriminated against. If we can act now, it may well be that we can avert far greater and graver problems in the future.

TESTIMONY OF JACK B. TATE, GENERAL COUNSEL, FEDERAL

SECURITY AGENCY, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. THOMAS. We have with us today Mr. Tate, general counsel of the Federal Security Agency. We have not asked for a statement from the Federal Security Agency, whose information concerning the social-security program has been very helpful to the committee in its work. Nevertheless, Mr. Tate is very much interested in this particu lar nonresident problem and has so indicated; and it may be that the Federal Security Agency will have some observation or suggestion to make, and we have therefore invited Mr. Tate here this morning.

Mr. TATE. It seems to me and I am emphasizing the "seems"that the emphasis of the various programs is more or less on aid to the migrants as individuals, but there is nothing that takes care of them as a group.

Now, you have in the States, as we all recognize, a serious limitation on relief and subsistence generally, in the settlement laws, and the only way you can overcome that limitation in a clear-cut way and grant aid is to put a condition on the grant that there be no residence requirement for eligibility, whenever such grant may be made.

The problem exists to a greater or less extent in every one of the grants-in-aid programs we have talked about. You talked about the venereal-disease program. The problem of settlement or residence is