clothed with authority to act, but I believe we have seen that is just illusion. The Federal Housing Administration has done splendid work in making available funds for home building and modernization, but it could hardly do more than release a portion of the frozen capital and regulate mortgage practices. In the same way, the Home Owners' Loan Corporation has stimulated the repair of many dwellings and has saved many homes from foreclosure, but its primary function is limited to that of a refinancing agency. The Resettlement Administration and P. W. A. are primarily emergency relief agencies and are not designed to inaugurate a housing program of any substantial consequence. That is why I believe that the Wagner housing bill is the only measure now before Congress and the Nation that would fill this vital need. It will not only bring together the several phases of housing activity now carried on by the Federal Government but will make it possible to undertake a coordinated and effective housing plan, designed along modest lines, yet Nation-wide in scope. For this reason alone it will be most practicable and effective to place the administration of the program into the hands of an independent corporate agency such as the United States Housing Authority contemplated by section 3 of the act. In further considering the provisions of this bill it is, indeed, gratifying to find that section 16 includes a set of safeguards which experience has shown are essential to protect the standards of labor in construction work. The minimum wage and hours standards included in this section and the antikickback provision are well designed to protect the worker who will be employed on low-rent housing and slum-clearance projects under this legislation. I am thinking about these splendid men, the building machanics, who so patiently and in a large way uncomplainingly have borne the brunt of these 5 or 6 years of terrible unemployment. Just think of it, a group of mechanics, 80 percent of them idle month after month and year after year, and now, if the tide is to turn, as we hope it will, we will move back so that those figures will be reversed, and instead of 80 percent unemployed, 90 to 100 percent will be accorded working opportunities. Shall they be given work at decent wages, or shall they suffer more and make additional sacrifices? It is unfair to ask them to do that, and that is why we maintain the standard rates shall be observed and protected, and the prevailing wage paid to these splendid men, and they are now accorded an opportunity to earn a decent living and pay some of the debts which they have been bound to incur during the last few years. I am also gratified to see that the bill provides for "public housing societies", which are to be organized to promote and administer lowcost housing, whose members will be composed of the beneficiaries of the program in a given locality. I believe that this provision will make it possible to develop low-rent housing on a community basis, where recreational activities and other community functions could be developed by joint effort of the members of the community in a most economical and yet a most effective way. In considering the proposed legislation as a whole, I must point out that it is a measure that is founded on the realistic premise that there exists an acute housing shortage and that this housing shortage will be doubly aggravated unless the situation is remedied immediately. The bill also recognizes the fact that private enterprise cannot do alone the job that must be done. At the same time, the measure provides every possible safeguard against competition with private industry. The simple plan of subsidies for housing, by making available public funds at low interest rates, is at once a simple and a statemanlike approach to the problem. The bill recognizes that by having adequate control of standards in subsidized housing is the only way to insure the benefit from subsidies in the form of low rentals and better living conditions. Organized labor in its entire membership is urging the immediate passage of the Wagner housing bill. On behalf of the wage earners of America and their families, I ask your committee to give this measure your favorable and prompt consideration. Now, gentlemen, I want to say in conclusion that as the result of studies we have made of this problem, both from the economic and the social point of view, I have become convinced that we are proposing here the most important piece of legislation that has been offered during this session of Congress. I have passed from the serious or superficial study of the problem to the point where you mean it is of tremendous importance. I shall do everything that lies within my power to mobilize the support of public opinion in behalf of this measure, and I cannot believe that this session of Congress will adjourn before enacting this measure into law. If they do, they will be neglecting, in my judgment, an opportunity to help solve one of the gravest social and economic problems with which our country is confronted. I think if we could enact this measure into law, and simultaneously apply a 30-hour week to industry, that our unemployment would be solved. I thank you gentlemen. I have some tables here, to which reference has been made in my statement, together with some additional tables, and I would like to submit them for inclusion in the record. The CHAIRMAN. Those tables may be included as a part of the record. (The matter referred to is as follows:) TABLE I.-Economic activity in Great Britain, 1928-34 TABLE II.-Estimated family incomes, urban owner and tenant families, based on Federal survey of urban housing for 1933 and estimated changes in national income, 1933-35 NOTE.-Under $1,500,000,000 equals 69.9 percent in 1933, 64.1 percent in 1934, and 60.4 percent in 1935 in the New England States; under $1,200,000,000 equals 64.6 percent in 1933, 60.6 percent in 1934, and 56.9 percent in 1935, in the Southeastern States; and under $1,500,000,000 equals 67.9 percent in 1933, 62.1 percent in 1934, and 58.4 percent in 1935, in the Southern States. TABLE III.—Family income distribution, urban owner and tenant families, Financial Survey of Urban Housing, 1933 Source: Financial Survey of Urban Housing by the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce; estimates by Warren Vinton, director of research, Suburban Resettlement Administration. New dwellings built, 1930-35. Dwellings demolished, 1930-35. Net increase in dwellings, 1930–35_-. [Estimate made by Catherine Bauer, Executive Secretary, Labor Housing Conference, and Coleman Woodbury, Director, National Association of Housing Officials] Purely quantitative needs: Estimated net increase in households, 1930–45_ Total dwelling units needed to house additional families, Surplus dwellings, 1930.. Total additional dwelling units needed to house increase in 500, 000 200, 000 300, 000 Total additional dwelling units needed, 1935-45 to meet oc- To achieve and maintain minimum physical standards: 6, 764, 000 Annual replacements, at 1 percent per annum of total dweilings, 3, 216, 000 3, 216, 000 Total additional dwelling units needed to meet minimum 13, 196, 000 TABLE V.-Table of building permits issued in 751 cities of 10,000 population or more in the first quarter of 1935 and 1836 Residential.. Nonresidential. Alterations and repairs. Total.. Families... Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1929. 1930 1931. 1932 TABLE VI.-Value of building permits, 1929-35 (257 identical cities) Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics and research staff American Federation of Labor. 1 A certain proportion of these additional dwelling units needed will doubtless be provided by the subdivision of existing larger dwellings. Certainly not more than 2,000,000 units, most of them unsatisfactory, could be provided in this way, however. On the other hand, there was a certain proportion of "doubling up" even in 1930, not recorded in the Census. If we were to establish and maintain a real family occupancy standard (one decent dwelling for each distinct family unit), we would have to allow at least an additional million new dwellings. TABLE VII.-Number of families provided with new housing, 1929-35 (257 identical cities) Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics and research staff American Federation of Labor. 25,879 10.6 22, 063 9.0 55, 810 22.8 Source: F. W. Dodge Corporation and Research Staff, American Federation of Labor. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics and Research Staff, American Federation of Labor. The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Ryan, we will be glad to have you come forward. STATEMENT OF RT. REV. JOHN A. RYAN The CHAIRMAN. Your full name is what? Dr. RYAN. Rt. Rev. John A. Ryan, D. D. The CHAIRMAN. I think that is sufficient introduction. You may proceed and give your views on this proposed legislation. Dr. RYAN. Before doing that I would like to utter one sentence of appreciation and admiration for the draftsmen of this bill. I do not know anything about the technique of it, but it seems to me this bill is drawn up with the greatest comprehensiveness, and I do not think it has left anything out. The problem of low-rent housing, for which Senate bill 4424 proposes a solution, has many phases. Therefore the bill can be supported by many and various arguments. Undoubtedly all the phases of the problem and all the arguments for the bill will be discussed and presented at these hearings. Much as I should like to deal with its economic aspects and implications, I refrain for two reasons: |