Mr. CUTLER. We remember our experience in 1933 and 1934. It took unprepared highway officials 3 months to put $96,000,000 worth of work under contract at a time when they all had adequate staffs. This is not said disparagingly, but is meant to bring out and emphasize the fact that it takes time to launch a sizable program, such as is needed and contemplated when hostilities cease and post-war highway funds are made available. Every thinking person realizes the waste of doing work with illconceived or hastily prepared plans. Careful preliminary study by skilled engineers is always worth more than its cost. It prevents many costly mistakes. The expensive further outlays so often encountered on hastily and inadequately planned projects are avoided. Detailed study will often save thousands of dollars on 1 mile of construction in hilly or mountainous country. Costs of surveys naturally vary with the topography and with the density of population. (An average survey party costs $1,000 per month for personnel alone.) Plan costs vary widely with the size and number of bridges to be built. Plan costs will average 2.5 to 3 percent of the contract cost. Taking Kentucky as an average State, our estimate is that it will require and keep 25 field parties and 125 road and bridge designers busy for each year's work on the scale proposed. Personnel losses to the armed forces and to higher pay in war industries have reduced our present Kentucky organization to 4 field parties and 12 designers. We hope we can augment our forces and have at least 1 year's construction plans ahead by fall and plans for 2 years' work ahead by this time next if this bill is promptly passed. Until we know the provisions of the bill, however, we cannot efficiently direct and concentrate our efforts. Our experience has been that it takes as long to secure rights-of-way efficiently as it does to make surveys and plans, and the plans must be approved before securing the rights-of-way can start. Summing up, if highway administrators are to function as they can and should, we need to know from Congress what funds will be made available, and for what purposes they may be used, and as soon as possible. With this information at hand, it is up to us to get busy, and I think I can safely assert that we will. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Cutler. I want to say this: That this committee appreciates fully the value of getting this legislation passed at an early date. However, I am wondering just why that should interfere especially with your plans. We had thought that the various States would take advantage of the bill we passed last year providing funds for making plans, designs, and specifications, and that immediately at the close of the war, if such a bill as this passes, we would be ready to proceed with the work. So haven't you already in your State certain plans for definite projects outlined; blueprints prepared, so to speak, ready to go to work on them should the war close, say, within 3 or 4 months? Mr. CUTLER. Yes, Mr. Chairman; we have. We have probably $11,500,000 of work on which we have surveys, plans, and rights-of-way ready to pull out and advertise, and we probably will have $20,000,000 of work ready by this fall. But some of that work we have done may not fit the bill. I may not have brought it out, but our forces are so small we should not make surveys and plans for something which is not covered in the bill. The CHAIRMAN. We can agree with you on that and we can promise you definitely that we are very anxious to get the bill out at an early date and let you know definitely what you can expect. But we do feel that you should go on, if you have not already done so. Mr. CUTLER. I think all States have gone ahead. We might have quite a few projects on which we spent considerable time and they may not fit. The CHAIRMAN. I think we understand each other on that. Mr. WHITTINGTON. So you do not think we made a mistake in providing for these plans a year ago last July? Mr. CUTLER. No, sir; it was very timely. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You have gone ahead and made the plans? Mr. WHITTINGTON. What is the indebtedness against your highway commission for highway construction in Kentucky? Mr. CUTLER. We have no indebtedness. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You have been paying as you go? Mr. CUTLER. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You have not gone as fast as you might. Mr. CUTLER. No, sir; it is a little slow. Mr. WHITTINGTON. I travel from Louisville to Memphis. Mr. CUTLER. So you know some of our needs. Mr. WHITTINGTON. I am not criticizing your policy. Mr. GAVIN. He sounds like a Pennsylvanian. Mr. WHITTINGTON. What is the public debt of the Commonwealth of Kentucky? Mr. CUTLER. We have no public indebtedness; we have a surplus of about $9,000,000. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Not more than that? After the legislature met? Mr. CUILER. They are meeting now. Mr. WHITTINGTON. I can appreciate what you say is right important. How will this bill affect Kentucky if it is passed as it is? Mr. CUTLER. I think the bill is satisfactory. We are for it. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You are satisfied with it? Mr. CUTLER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Suppose we cut down contributions from the Federal Government to 50 percent. Would Kentucky still be well satisfied? Mr. CUTLER. I would answer that yes and no. In other words, we could not match the Federal Government if this bill was for $1,000,000 a year and Kentucky would have to match 50-50. We could not put on our program as we just do not have the income. We do not make it that fast. We do not have it. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Speaking about what you do not have, I appreciate it. You have always thought about it in Kentucky. We kind of got to thinking about what we haven't got up here in Washington for the country. When we think that formerly States, and particularly counties, by statute and constitutional amendment in many cases, were not permitted to contract debt or to issue bonds in excess of 10 or 15 percent of the assessed valuation of those States or smaller subdivisions, and when we have in mind that your State for neither highway nor public purposes has any public indebtedness, and that already the United States has substantially two-thirds of the estimated value of our national wealth outstanding as a public debt, you can appreciate that even if we provided the plans there might be difficulty in executing them. Mr. CUTLER. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Down in Kentucky you know generally the strategic network of roads necessary to benefit your State? Mr. CUTLER. Yes, sir. You no doubt have been over most of our important roads. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You have not contracted for all of the roads that would be on your strategic system? Mr. CUTLER. Not according to modern standards. Mr. WHITTINGTON. And, as a matter of fact, I do not think you have constructed those that would be regarded as tentative regional. Mr. CUTLER. They are all tentative regional, but they are a long ways from being modern. Mr. WHITTINGTON. So that you have a lot of work to do on this. Mr. CUTLER. Yes; they are horse-and-buggy roads. Mr. WHITTINGTON. You would have a lot to do on those that go to connect up the interregional highways, wouldn't you? Mr. CUTLER. Yes, sir. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Now, what would you think, with the information that you have and your knowledge about congressional undertakings now, when we must provide public works, provide the same yardsticks for your local roads that are essential, that we provide for your strategic highways and interregional highways, as far as the Federal contributions are concerned? Do you think the Federal Government, which now has a debt of $250,000,000,000 can increase its contribution to a greater extent than it did when we had a public debt of $15,000,000,000 in 1916 and 1921? Mr. CUTLER. Could I answer that by a question? Mr. WHITTINGTON. If you think you can be more helpful by asking me a question. Mr. CUTLER. When these boys come home and we try to reconvert and get them adjusted in civilian life and there are no jobs for them, how will you take care of those boys? I believe that if we enact this bill we can take care of them effectively. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Yes; that is true. I will not argue with you because I believe in public works. But now we may run into some difficulties if we undertake to provide for employment of 10,000,000 men in this permanent regional and strategic network of highway construction. As you and I know, it is a very large project. Mr. CUTLER. But you have a considerable job to do there. You have a tough job ahead of you. Mr. WHITTINGTON. That is why I am asking you these questions. We have more than a tough job. We want to provide jobs for the men when they come back, but they are going to be more and more in my thought, as I see it. We will have to provide for the ex-service men. Mr. CUTLER. Heretofore we have come to Washington to provide for all the unemployment. Kentucky and Mississippi have an obligation to pay those men who are fighting for our Government. Mr. WHITTINGTON. Yes; all the States have obligations to the men of the Army and Navy and the various services. Our States have got that obligation and I am thinking of that obligation. Here it is. particularly that where the national agency has interests not as great in the local road as in the main thoroughfare. It is a tough job. I am asking for your full views on this matter, just as I asked Major Whitman for his views a moment ago. Do you think the national interests are as great in local roads as in the major roads? Mr. CUTLER. Nationally you might be more interested in through roads. But, after all, people on the rural roads are still people. Mr. WHITTINGTON. As a representative of the Highway Commission of the State of Kentucky you have been perfectly frank. Do you feel that the national interest and the national justification for Federal contributions are as great and to the same extent in main roads and main thoroughfares as in the local roads? What is your opinion in regard to those roads in your own State? Mr. CUTLER. That is a pretty hard question to answer. Mr. WHITTINGTON. What is your answer? and make any explanations you want to make. Give us a "yes" or "no," Mr. CUTLER. I would say that as a national body you probably would not be as interested in the local roads, but I still think those local roads are very important. Mr. WHITTINGTON. We are not discounting their importance at all. I know from a popular and from the standpoint of the average State that each State has a system of interregional highways and then they have a lot of county roads, and our constituents want the county roads improved; but when we come to providing improvement for the county roads from a financial standpoint, we find we have a very tough problem. Mr. CUTLER. If the States were allowed to use the Federal excise tax to the full value, possibly they would not be coming to Congress for appropriations. Mr. WHITTINGTON. And possibly we would not be able to make a Federal-aid appropriation. That is all, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions by anybody? Mr. BONNER. I have a question. On page 3 of your statement you say: "There are any number of worthy and needed projects for which funds will not be available in the bill now under consideration." It looks to me like the bill has got about everything in it that anybody could think of. Mr. CUTLER. We made a survey of our highway needs. It is our opinion that if this bill is passed, it might answer one-third of our present needs. Mr. BONNER. Do you mean that the Federal contribution is not enough? Mr. CUTLER. It is not enough to modernize our system, and every State is in the same fix. The CHAIRMAN. It will take some time to do that. Are there any other questions? On Monday the program will be this: We will hear 'first from Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, and California. After that we will hear from Connecticut, and that will take a little more time. Mr. Cox wants to be heard. Mr. Cox and another witness from Connecticut will take more time than any of the other States Monday morning. (Thereupon the committee adjourned, to meet on Monday, March 6, 1944, at 10 a. m.) FEDERAL AID FOR POST-WAR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION MONDAY, MARCH 6, 1944 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee met at 10 a. m., the Honorable J. W. Robinson, chairman, presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. When we recessed Saturday we announced we were ready to start on the hearings with reference to the various States, beginning with Alabama. Is the representative from Alabama present? Mr. SWIFT. Yes, sir. STATEMENT OF G. R. SWIFT, STATE HIGHWAY DIRECTOR FOR ALABAMA The CHAIRMAN. Will you state your name for the record? The CHAIRMAN. Just a few preliminary questions. Does Alabama have a road commission? Mr. SWIFT. No, sir; highway director, one man. The CHAIRMAN. And you are the director? Mr. SWIFT. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You are an engineer? Mr. SWIFT. No; I am not. The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Swift; you may proceed. Mr. SWIFT. All of the personnel of our State highway department is under our State merit system, except the director, who is appointed by the Governor. The CHAIRMAN. For what period? Mr. SWIFT. For the Governor's term of office, unless he removes him. The CHAIRMAN. Your term of office is subject to the approval of the Governor? Mr. SWIFT. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. How long have you served in this capacity? The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed. Mr, SWIFT. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: In speaking for Alabama, may I briefly describe its road system. The State's system consists of 6,569 miles. The country roads of the 67 counties aggregate, in round figures, 60,000 miles. The county roads system of 60,000 miles is largely without permanent surfacing and varies greatly with the different counties. |