I refer to the States in the South and in the deep South. In those areas FEPC bills are not even introduced, let alone seriously considered. It is true there have been encouraging signs in the border areas. Kansas enacted a resolution this year appointing a committee to investigate employment. And it can only come out with one finding and one conclusion, that voluntary means are ineffective, and that you cannot eliminate unemployment by giving out good-will blotters or appealing to men's humanitarian instincts. I have prepared a detailed comparison of the bill before this subcommittee with the so-called Ives-Fulton bill of last session, which has been reintroduced, and if the chairman believes it of any value I would like to introduce this detailed comparison for the record. Mr. POWELL. Without objection it is so ordered. (The document referred to is as follows:) Title (preamble; sec. 1). Findings (sec. 2a). Purpose (sec. 2c). Intent (secs. 2d and 2b). Definitions: Chief points of difference between the Ives-Fulton and the McGrath-Powell FEPC bills Organization having 50 or more employed members which exists Trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication In commerce, or burdening or obstructing commerce or the free Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands All possessions and trust territories held by United States under Fair Employment Practice Commission. No provision (but included in definition of employer, sec. 3b). Exempts employment of aliens outside continental United 5 members appointed by President with advice and consent of 1 member designated by President to be Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman to act as Chairman in absence or vacancy. Chief points of difference between the Ives-Fulton and the McGrath-Powell FEPC bills-Continued FEDERAL FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE ACT Empower councils to study problem or specific instances of dis- Same, but does not include ancestry. Same, but also to receive per diem as authorized by 5 U S. C, |