bert Hoover, who was then Secretary of Commerce, spoke to an annual meeting of our association. I believe I am right about the year. At that time he advocated the creation of a public works agency that would absorb the activities of the Corps of Army Engineers. From what I have heard before and during this hearing today we have reason to believe that Mr. Hoover has that same opinion. We would be very much opposed to that.

Mr. KARSTEN. Is that the MVA that you are speaking of, sir?

Mr. WINTER. We don't like an MVA, either. We were very well pleased with the development under the existing agencies of government. We have a coordinated program with the Soil Conservation Service, the Corps of Army Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and other agencies.

Mr. LANHAM. Are any private power interests interested in your organization or how they made any contributions to it? Mr. WINTER. If they do, it would be very minor, sir.

Mr. KARSTEN. Do they do it at all?

Mr. WINTER. Yes; I think so.

Mr. LANHAM. That is why you are not in favor of the MVA?

Mr. WINTER. No; that is why we are in favor of the Pick-Sloan plan which does provide for the generation of power.

Mr. LANHAM. But sale through private companies.

Mr. WINTER. The present plan provides for the sale, first, to cooperatives, municipal organizations, and public institutions, and then what is left private industry gets under the present plan. We have no objection to that whatsoever.

Mr. KARSTEN. That is the Pick-Sloan plan you are talking about? Mr. WINTER. Yes, sir.

I want to call your attention, though, to section 6 of this proposed law, the law that you are discussing, on page 7, which reads:

Except as may be otherwise provided pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the provisions of the reorganization plan shall take effect upon the expiration of the first period of 60 calendar days, of continuous session of the Congress, following the date on which the plan is transmitted to it, but only if, between the date of transmittal and the expiration of such 60-day period there has not been passed by the two Houses a concurrent resolution stating in substance that the Congress does not favor the reorganization plan.

Supposing, gentlemen, that the President then presents to the Congress a proposal, a part of which you are in favor of and a part of which you are opposed to. I raise that question in all sincerity. We were talking about dividing it today between military and nonmilitary. I ask you, and I am not a lawyer and not an engineer, not a legislator, in all sincerity if the President should come in with a proposition providing for the absorption of the Corps of Army Engineers by some civilian agency, Department of Interior, Public Works, or any other department, and you were opposed to that, but there was another part of the same proposal that you liked, I don't believe that in this bill you could separate it and accept part of the President's proposal and reject a part of it.

Mr. KARSTEN. That is the exact purpose of the bill. If you can go along and reject each one individually, you are going to do it, and you will have no effective reorganization. That is the exact purpose of the bill as the other system has been tried through the years and you have never had a reorganization. That is really the heart

of the bill that you are talking about. If you take that out, you have no reorganization act.

Mr. WINTER. We have no reason to believe that President Truman desires to put the Corps of Army Engineers under any other agency. Mr. KARSTEN. I believe we are all of that opinion.

Mr. WINTER. Unless he would be influenced by some outside force or outside influence. Suppose it is done, Congress is going to give away the right to say "yes" to this and "no" to that.

The CHAIRMAN. No.

Mr. KARSTEN. We would still have the authority to reject that plan-and, by the debate on the floor, it would be quite apparent what kind of plan we wanted-and he could submit another one, or we could ahead and initiate action ourselves, then, incorporating our ideas. Mr. WINTER. Provided only one idea came in the bill.

go

Mr. KARSTEN. No.

Mr. LANHAM. We would reject the entire plan and let him send down a plan that would meet our approval.

The CHAIRMAN. We could reject the entire plan, this committee could meet and could vote out a plan that included everything except the part that had been rejected; and, if it had such time and intent and the Congress were for it, we could pass it through the Congress with everything else, except the part that was objectionable.

Mr. WINTER. Again I say, Mr. Chairman, I am not an attorney; but, as I read that—as a layman reads it-I see no possibility of accepting part of it that Congress approves and rejecting another part.

Mr. LANHAM. We have to reject it all; but the point is, from the debate on the floor, the President would know what he could get through and would send down another plan. Of course, we would have to turn down the plan.

Mr. BURNSIDE. Or this committee to submit a plan of its own.

Mr. WINTER. Our organization has its annual meeting in St. Louis next week. So far as I know, and so far as I have ever been able to find in the record of the organization, that organization has not expressed its position on reorganization of the government. Of the hundreds of members we have, I feel sure that reorganization of the executive departments of the Government would find a very sympathetic ear. They are average American men in this organization. We are very jealous, though, of the Corps of Engineers.

Mr. KARSTEN. The basic proposition on which your organization was set up was from the standpoint of navigation, if I understood you correctly.

Mr. WINTER. That originally was.

Mr. KARSTEN. Is that not still your basic interest?

Mr. WINTER. I think not. I think we spend more of our attention and time on soil conservation than we do on navigation and such. I started to say flood control, too, but I don't mean that.

Mr. KARSTEN. Engineering projects of the engineers are very helpful to the members of your association in connection with the barge traffic and the traffic going up and down the river, as I understand it. Mr. WINTER. That is true.

Mr. KARSTEN. And you would have a very practical and fundamental interest in seeing that the engineers are carried on so they can continue that work to help the private operators operate on these rivers.

Mr. WINTER. Not only private operators.

Mr. KARSTEN. Also your Government operations.

Mr. WINTER. Our organization has far more shippers than barge operators. Our membership is large. Over 95 percent of our membership have no direct interest in barge lines.

Mr. KARSTEN. But your primary interest, as I saw it at the beginning, was navigation. These other things have come along in recent years and you have taken on soil conservation and the other subjects. Your primary interest then was-and still is, it would appear to me— navigation on the river.

Mr. WINTER. Not our primary interest; no, sir. I wouldn't say that. That is a part. We have a five-point program. I am speaking particularly now of the Missouri River because that is typical. Flood control first. Soil conservation, irrigation, navigation, and power are two incidental benefits that come from the over-all program.

Mr. KARSTEN. But it has been in recent years that you have taken on these other activities. At the outset, it was simply a navigation proposition with you.

Mr. WINTER. That was as far back as 1919, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there any other question anyone wishes to ask the witness?

Thank you.

At this time we want to present for the record a statement of Mr. A. E. Lyon, executive secretary of the Railway Labor Executives Association, asking for exemption of four agencies: The Interstate Commerce Commission, National Mediation Board, National Railway Adjustment Board, and Railway Retirement Board.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF A. E. LYON, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, RAILWAY LABOR EXECUTIVES' ASSOCIATION, TO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, WITH RESPECT TO H. R. 1569

This statement is respectfully presented in behalf of the Railway Labor Executives' Association, consisting of the following organizations of railroad employees:

Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen.

Order of Railway Conductors of America.

Switchmen's Union of North America.

Order of Railroad Telegraphers.

American Train Dispatchers' Association.

Railway Employees' Department, A. F. of L.

International Association of Machinists.

International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders & Helpers of America.

International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers, and Helpers.

Sheet Metal Workers' International Association.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

Brotherhood Railway Carmen of America.

International Brotherhood of Firemen & Oilers.

Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees.

Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees.

Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen of America.

National Organization Masters, Mates & Pilots of America.

National Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association.

International Longshoremen's Association.

Hotel & Restaurant Employees and Bartenders International Union.
Railroad Yardmasters of America.

These organizations represent more than 80 percent of the railway employees in the United States.

Our association has considered the pending bill (H. R. 1569), and we are opposed to it unless it is amended so as to exempt certain agencies in which we have a vital concern. These agencies are: (1) the National Mediation Board and the National Railroad Adjustment Board, both of which were created by and function under the Railway Labor Act, (2) the Railroad Retirement Board, and (3) the Interstate Commerce Commission. These agencies perform services of great importance to the railroad industry and to the public, and railroad employees have a vital interest in their unimpaired functioning under the carefully considered laws which created them.

The collective-bargaining and labor-relations machinery established by the Railway Labor Act of 1926, with the amendments adopted in 1934, is very frequently cited by Members of Congress and others as being a sound and tested method of maintaining industrial peace in one of the country's most important industries. This law created the National Mediation Board and established its duties and functions. It also created the National Railroad Adjustment Board as a necessary means for the peaceful adjustment or adjudication of types of labor disputes not assigned by the law to the Mediation Board.

These two agencies were deliberately established as separate and independent bodies to deal with specialized and technical labor problems in the railway industry. There were good reasons for this action when the law was enacted, and those reasons are still valid.

We object to the enactment of a law which would permit the merger, abolition, or discontinuance of the functions of these Boards created by the Railway Labor Act. We object to any permission being given for plans or programs to be made which would even contemplate such action. The confusion and uncertainties which such planning would produce would be harmful, even though no program were eventually adopted or approved by the Congress. We do not want the Railway Labor Act revised or portions of it nullified by any planners or consolidators, in or out of government. If it is to be revised, we want careful consideration to be given in the normal and democratic way through the legislative processes of the Congress.

The Railroad Retirement Board should certainly be exempted from the provisions of the pending bill. The Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act, both of which are administered by the Board, provide for systems of Nation-wide and uniform annuity and unemployment benefits for railway employees. These systems require, if they are to continue to serve the purposes of Congress when the laws were enacted, that the Board be protected in its status as a separate and independent agency and that none of its duties, functions, or responsibilities be discontinued.

The benefits paid to railroad employees, through the Board, and the cost of administration, are borne from funds paid by the employees and by the carriers. The Government does not contribute to these costs. The Board is doing a good job, and we do not want it interfered with by any planning or consideration of any possible merger with another agency or any discontinuing of any of its functions. We urgently request that it be specifically exempted from the provisions of the bill now before you.

We also urge that the Interstate Commerce Commission be exempted. The Commission was created as an independent establishment by act of Congress over 50 years ago. We believe it is proper to regard the Commission as an agent of the Congress empowered and required to regulate interstate commerce in the public interest. It is vital to the proper performance of this duty that the Commission be completely independent-both as to its policies and in its administrative machinery.

Aside from the interests which railway employees as citizens and taxpayers have in the work of the Commission, they also have a vital interest in the proper administration and enforcement of railway safety laws and regulations. These duties of the Commission are most important to the public, the carriers, and to the railway employees, and we do not want them curtailed or interfered with through any merger, consolidation, coordination, or abolition of functions.

For the reasons I have briefly outlined, we respectfully request that your committee amend H. R. 1569 in a manner to specifically exempt or exclude the four agencies I have mentioned. This could be accomplished by including in section 5 of H. R. 1569 language substantially similar to that of section 5 (b) of Public Law 263, Seventy-ninth Congress, as follows:

"No reorganization plan shall provide for any reorganization affecting any agency named below in this subsection, except that this prohibition shall not apply to the transfer to such agency of the whole or any part of, or the whole or any part of the functions of, any agency not so named. No reorganization contained in any reorganization plan shall take effect if the reorganization plan is in violation of this subsection. The agencies above referred to in this subsection are as follows: Interstate Commerce Commission,

National Mediation Board, National Railroad Adjustment Board, and Railroad Retirement Board."

The CHAIRMAN. We have no other witnesses. We will bring the hearings to a close at this time, and we will go into a short executive session. I will ask those who are not members of the committee to retire.

(Whereupon, at 4:25 p. m., the committee adjourned, subject to the call of the Chair.)