« 이전계속 »
Statement of Continued
Pollock, Dr. James K., former member, Hoover Commission..
Sanders, J. T., legislative counsel, the National Grange.------------
Benson, Hon. Ezra Taft, Secretary of Agriculture:
Appendix A-Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953—Department
of Agriculture (authority similar to that in effective plans for
agement of the Executive Branch of the Government.------- 147
Memorandum No. 1320 — Administrative grouping of Depart-
Agriculture, effective January 21, 1953...
Illinois: Appendix B-Senate action on reorganization plans, 81st
Excerpts from Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953.------------ 88, 90
Association, April 14, 1953.--.
May 9, 1953, and statement relative to plan 2 of 1953.----
Johns Departnited Stallen vorsional Record (
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by-Continued
Humphrey, Hon. Hubert H., a United States Seuator from the State
Table— United States Department of Agriculture, legal basis of
Letter from E. H. Agnew, president, South Carolina Farm
Bureau, Inc., to Senator John L. McClellan, April 29, 1950.--
Kerr, Hon. Robert S., a United States Senator from the State of
Oklahoma: Letter to Senator Margaret Chase Smith, May 15, 1953.-
Excerpts from Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953. ----
Murray, Hon. James E., a United States Senator from the State of
farm editors at the Department of Agriculture, April 23, 1953.-
Excerpt from Notice General-101, placed in the Congressional
Record by Congressman Fred Marshall.----
Excerpt from the Louisville Courier-Journal, April 23, 1953.---
Suggested addition to Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1950------- 193
Excerpts from Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1950 and Reorgani-
zation Plan No. 2 of 1953.----
Excerpts from the Reorganization Act of 1949 -----
of Maine, and chairman, Senate Government Operations Sub-
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by-Continued
Smith, Hon. Margaret Chase, a United States Senator from the State
plan No. 4 of 1950 and plan No. 2 of 1953..
REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 2 OF 1953
(Department of Agriculture)
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 1953
UNITED STATES SENATE,
Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a. m., in room 357, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C., Senator Margaret Chase Smith (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding
Present: Senators Margaret Chase Smith (Republican, Maine), Henry C. Dworshak (Republican, Idaho), Everett McKinley Dirksen (Republican, Illinois), Clyde R. Hoey (Democrat, North Carolina), John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts).
Present also: Senators John L. McClellan (Democrat, Arkansas) and Stuart Symington (Democrat, Missouri), Walter L. Reynolds, chief clerk and staff director, Ann M. Grickis, assistant chief clerk, and Glenn K. Shriver, professional staff member.
Senator Smith. The subcommittee will come to order.
The Subcommittee on Reorganization has before it today Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953, providing for reorganizations in the Department of Agriculture, which the President transmitted to the Congress under date of March 25, under authority of the Reorganization Act of 1949, as amended. It will also give consideration to S. Res. 100, introduced by Senator Russell, of Georgia, disapproving the plan.
The plan under consideration is one of several proposals that have been before the Congress in the past, providing for reorganizations in the Department of Agriculture. The Department consists of many interrelated offices, bureaus, administrations, services, and corporations established over a period of approximately 90 years, to provide specified services to the American farmers and consumers. It is one of the most important agencies of the Federal Government, and its activities affect, either directly or indirectly, the lives and well-being of every one of our citizens. In each instance where the Congress has given consideration to the reorganization of the Department, practically every witness appearing before the committees having such legislation under consideration has stressed the importance of its activities and the essential need for better integration of its services and functions under centralized administrative control.
The Hoover Commission, in its reports to the Congress in 1949, made a number of general recommendations for the centralization of functions and the promotion of adequate administrative controls applying generally to all departments and agencies of the Government. These reports stressed the importance of vesting full responsibility for
the performance of all functions and operations of the departments of the Federal Government in the head of the department, with clear lines of authority reaching down through every step of organization. The Hoover Commission, in addition to recommending that each of the department heads should have adequate staff assistance, and vested with full administrative authority to reorganize his department, submitted 16 specific recommendations in a special report on the Department of Agriculture with a view to insuring better organization and more effective administration of the functions vested by statute in the Department.
Recognizing the complexities of its internal structure and the number of its functions which overlapped into other Federal activities and into areas affecting State, county, and local governments, the Hoover Commission prescribed a specific organizational structure for the Department, grouped into eight major.units. Its report clearly indicated the difficulties that would be encountered in attempting to reorganize the Department of Agriculture, on a basis which would take into adequate consideration the many important areas of its activities and operations.
Following the submission of the Hoover Commission reports, a bill (S. 2055) was introduced in the 81st Congress by the present chairman of the full committee, which had been drafted by attorneys for the Commission and submitted to this committee at the suggestion of the former chairman of this full committee. This bill proposed to carry out the recommendations of the Hoover Commission, as interpreted by its attorneys, and was referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry of the Senate, where no action developed in view of the complexity of the many problems involved.
The President subsequently submitted Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1950, providing for the reorganization of the Department of Agriculture. That plan, which was rejected in the Senate, was similar in many respects to the plan now being considered. The present plan, however, attempts to overcome some of the basic objections to the 1950 plan.
Following the rejection of plan No. 4 of 1950, the staff of this committee was directed to reevaluate the Hoover Commission recommendations, previous actions taken in relation to other departments, and to submit for consideration of the committee a revised bill designed to overcome objections raised to the bill (S. 1149) introduced in the 82d Congress. The staff completely redrafted the original Hoover Commission bill in an attempt to develop an acceptable proposal. This committee tentatively approved the proposed committee bill, but before filing it in the Senate, requested the chairman to submit it to the jurisdictional committees of the Congress for comments and recommendations, since it involved changes in substantive policy. No recommendations were made to this committee, as requested, and no further action has developed in regard to the reorganization of the Department of Agriculture, until the submission of the present plan. (See appendix A, p. 200.)
The President, in his message to the Congress transmitting Plan No. 2 of 1953, has recognized the past difficulties Congress has encountered in trying to deal with the complexities of reorganization within the Department of Agriculture. The plan attempts to meet some of the major objections raised to former proposals. In addition