ment of necessary legislation for providing continuing assistance to the transit industry.

Senator WILLIAMS. I have never been the acting chairman of a committee that has produced so much thoughtful testimony. Your statement certainly fits the pattern of the testimony of the day. It is excellent and I am grateful indeed that you did review for us some of the stimulation that our Federal programs brought to areas from Boston and San Francisco and in between.

There aren't too many named areas, I guess, that the amount of money made available was helpful to, but if you added the population of the areas that have been stimulated and helped by these Federal programs, it is significant indeed.

Chicago, Greater Chicago represents what, Mr. DeMent?

Mr. DEMENT. Seven or eight million people; that is what we consider in the metropolitan area, which is served by all of our types of mass transportation.

Senator WILLIAMS. Just the named areas you mentioned represents a whopping part of our population?

Mr. DEMENT. Right.

Senator WILLIAMS. We are grateful, indeed. The institute you are speaking for is a national organization?

Mr. DEMENT. Yes, sir; a national organizaiton.

Senator WILLIAMS. And how do you arrive at judgments on legislation? Is there an executive board?

Mr. DEMENT. Yes, sir; as I mentioned, the board, the policymaking board is made up of those cities that I read here. Maybe I can just repeat them: St. Louis, Chicago, Cleveland, Boston, New York City, Pittsburgh, San Francisco. We have two Canadian cities.

Senator WILLIAMS. You have Montreal and Toronto.

Mr. DEMENT. And they are both going forward very aggressively in their areas with good rapid transit. Toronto has an excellent subway system.

Senator WILLIAMS. I am not familiar with Montreal, but Toronto is really a showcase of what can be developed.

Mr. DEMENT. Right.

Senator WILLIAMS. In new systems.

Mr. DEMENT. Exactly. Montreal will open their subway system in the fall.

Senator WILLIAMS. A new subway system?

Mr. DEMENT. Completely new; yes, sir. And they are building further, so that they can serve the new World's Fair area out on the island, which will be opened before the fair is opened also.

Senator WILLIAMS. Well, you made a statement that I agree with, and we have talked about it for years, and people are beginning to realize that it is accurate. If you plan entirely on the fare box for operations and improvements, you are defeating yourself because the fares go up and the service goes down. And you lose your patronage. Mr. DEMENT. Yes.

To speak about something quite familiar, in Chicago we bought 180 cars within the last 2 years for $19 million. We bought about 600 buses in the last 2 or 3 years. We have built new garages, and we can do these kinds of things out of our fare box. But for the major capi

tal improvemnt-and when I say that I am speaking of an extension from one of our northwest lines in the Kennedy Expressway. When I was a highway engineer we provided the real estate, the right-of-way in the expressway for some future rapid transit, that kind of an expenditure, and also in the south end, if this bond issue goes through, and we can get the matching funds on a Federal basis, we will build 12 additional miles of rapid transit lines in median stripts of express

ways.

These median strips, I emphasize again, were provided by highway engineers that knew that the highway could not do the total job. Senator WILLIAMS. I can't recall precisely the statistics, but in a general way we have had testimony from Mr. Gunlock describing the median strip, the Congress Street Expressway.

Mr. DEMENT. Eisenhower now, but it was Congress, and we oldtimers think of it as the west route.

Senator WILLIAMS. There the median is used for rail, and as I recall it, at the peak hours, if the expressway were bumper to bumper, the rail line was carrying a lot more people, and on time.

Mr. DEMENT. That is right.

Senator WILLIAMS. And operating only at 40 percent.

Mr. DEMENT. We can still put more people on this line; the last year, our increase in ridership on the total system, buses as well as rapid transit, was about 122 million riders. This year, so far, up to Monday night, we are 412 million riders ahead of 1965. So we feel that some of the things that we have been doing to promote a good ride in the city, using a combination of feeder buses and rapid transit, is paying off.

Senator WILLIAMS. Now here is something we hear generally from those who are just plainly opposed to any Federal program. They say that you can develop or improve mass transit facilities, but people won't use them. They will insist on using their automobiles.

Can people be encouraged to use mass transit and rapid transit facilities?

Mr. DEMENT. In my experience, I would say positively they can be encouraged. I think that some of our older transit systems that do not have proper parking or exchange facilities, even from buses to rapid transit, or from private automobiles to rapid transit, such as the Skokie Swift demonstration, which the Government made possible and you fellows did. Here we provided 350 car spaces for parking, plus what we call a kiss-and-ride type of thing, where a person can drop someone and they go downtown and use the car during the day. We have expanded that to 520 car spaces, and we still load those parking lots up early in the morning so that some people cannot get in, which means that people will drive part way and then use rapid transit to get to the central city in a hurry. I think this is what has been demonstrated in Chicago.

Senator WILLIAMS. It is a pleasure for me to recall that the first demonstration of this fringe parking lot, on the rail line, was demonstrated outside of New Brunswick, N.J.

Mr. DEMENT. You are right.

Senator WILLIAMS. And it works. I agree with you; it works just as yours worked.

Mr. DEMENT. This is what we are trying to concentrate on with funds we have available, providing more of these types of facilities, where we have an interchange between surface vehicles to rapid transit. Senator WILLIAMS. What you are saying is that if you have a mass transit system that is efficient and convenient people will use it. Mr. DEMENT. Exactly, yes.

Senator WILLIAMS. Very good. Excellent.

Mr. DEMENT. And our increase in ridership is an indication of that very thing, because we have improved our parking lots, our interchange between bus feeder lines to the rapid transit, and it is showing up.

Senator WILLIAMS. Very good. We are grateful indeed, Mr. DeMent.

Mr. DEMENT. Thank you, Senator, for the privilege.

Senator WILLIAMS. We will recess until 10 tomorrow. We go back to the parent committee, room 5302.

(Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., the following day.)

HOUSING LEGISLATION FOR 1966

FRIDAY, APRIL 29, 1966

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:05 a.m., in room 5203, New Senate Office Building, Senator Harrison A. Williams, Jr. (acting chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senators Williams, Douglas, and Proxmire.

Senator WILLIAMS. We are honored indeed to have Mr. Stuart Saunders as our first witness on this final day of discussion about the mass transit proposals that we will be considering in this committee. I guess we are the first to see you publicly since you were recently merged?

Mr. SAUNDERS. I hope we are merged.

Senator WILLIAMS. You don't look sad.

Mr. SAUNDERS. I am not sad.

Senator WILLIAMS. Well, you have been before this committee before on our programs dealing with commuter transportation, and we are honored and pleased indeed that you are here.

Mr. SAUNDERS. Thank you very much, Senator.

STATEMENT OF STUART T. SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD CO.; ACCOMPANIED BY J. D. MORRIS, ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT, SPECIAL SERVICES

Mr. SAUNDERS. Mr. Chairman, perhaps I should state for the record that I am chairman of the board of the Pennsylvania Railroad Co., from Philadelphia, and I have with me Mr. J. D. Morris, our assistant vice president, special services.

I am grateful for this opportunity to appear here today in support of Senate bill 2804, for I am firmly convinced that Federal aid is desperately needed to help preserve and improve the rail commuter service that is indispensable to our national transportation system.

Approximately two-thirds of all Americans now live in urban communities, and this trend to the cities is accelerating at a rapid rate. As concentration of population intensifies, we face mounting problems in moving people quickly and safely within metropolitan areas.

The term "city" today seldom connotes the single geopolitical entity of a generation ago. Most cities are examples of the modern phenomenon known as urban sprawel. Already one-third of our people live in 10 supercities. At least 10 more such cities are rapidly developing.

Fast, economical, and efficient transportation is urgently needed to meet the requirements of such areas. The present congestion of traffic indicates clearly that highways alone cannot fulfill the need for surface mobility. There is simply not enough money or land to build enough highways to accommodate a 100-percent increase in personal travel predicted by 1980.

This outlook has prompted a reexamination of the potential of our commuter railroads. The last few years have brought a greatly increased interest in the advantages of rail transportation for the mass movement of people in a densely populated area.

We now realize anew the practicality and economy of commuter railroads. One rail line can carry twenty times as many passengers as one lane of an express highway. Expenditure of Government funds for this purpose is good economy not only for the Government but also the taxpayers, a much better value for the tax dollar than for additional highways in areas where transportation is already overly dependent on automobiles.

Throughout the country, cities are placing less reliance in their planning on the private automobile as the answer to commutation and local travel problems. Instead they are devising or reviving rail transit facilities. This is happening, for example, in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Philadelphia, New York, and Los Angeles- to name only a few cities.

Unfortunately, however, the economics of rail commutation are such that it is no longer a profitable enterprise for private business. The crux of the problem is utilization of equipment. Far and away the greatest volume of traffic is moved in about 4 hours-inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening. For the rest of the time, the expensive equipment and the crews are comparatively idle, as fewer and fewer people seem willing to use commuter trains for any purpose other than traveling to and from work.

Consequently, as you are aware, commuter railroads that must transport a large volume of rush-hour traffic for relatively short distances are incurring heavy losses. It costs them considerably more to carry their passengers than the passengers pay in fares. These huge operating deficits have made it financially unsound for railroads to modernize their commuter operations and develop them to their fullest potential.

Because of the growing conviction that this service is indispensable. State and local governments have begun to help railroads defray these expenses. So far, this assistance has been limited, not only because of slow acceptance of this responsibility, but also because of the lack of available funds. Nevertheless, the principle has been established that urban rail commutation is predominantly a public service rather than a private business enterprise. This public service concept is gaining headway throughout the Nation. Every day it is more widely acknowledged that where the general welfare and economic necessity calls for rail passenger service, the financial deficit should be a responsibility of Government.

It is logical that local authorities should turn to the Federal Government for supplemental funds in view of the vast contributions made to other forms of transportation. The amount of assistance being nght in this bill for urban rail transportation is modest indeed in