Mr. SCHERLE. In Illinois do you have a bill which allows the transportation of all children, parochial as well as public? Mr. LIBASSI. I am sorry I do not know the Illinois law on school transportation. Mr. SCHERLE. What is your home state? Mr. LIBASSI. I am with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. I am a resident of the District although I formerly resided in New York State. I don't know the busing laws in New York State. I might say 40 percent of the children in the United States are transported on school buses to schools so that school busing is certainly not anything that has come up as a result of the integration issue. Forty percent of the children in the United States ride public school buses and an untold number ride public transportation. Mr. SCHERLE. In Iowa we allow no parochial schoolchildren on public school buses. Whether this law will be changed I do not know. Would you bring up to date why $30 million was withheld in Chicago because they thought there was a segregation in the public schools? Mr. LIBASSI. Back in 1965 which was prior to my joining the staff of HEW, there were complaints that were received alleging school segregation in the city of Chicago, and the Office of Education requested the school officials in the city to provide them with information on the operation of the schools and the racial composition of the schools. The school officials did not make that information available and on the basis of the information that the Office of Education had and on the basis of the school officials' refusal to provide additional information, the Office of Education asked the State school superintendent to defer making additional payments to the city. Mr. SCHERLE. In other words as long as the money comes from the Federal Government whether they say there are strings or no strings attached to it, the Federal Government will hold the reins of funding over and above all State or local control: will they not? Mr. LIBASSI. The Constitution requires that the Federal funds be used only in schools operating in compliance, and the CongressMr. SCHERLE. Why did they not wait for proof rather than supposition? Why do this at the expense of the children or the students? Mr. LIBASSI. My recollection is that the deferral of funds was rescinded when the school officials agreed to provide the information that was requested and the deferral lasted for a very short period of time. Mr. SCHERLE. In other words the Government convicts them before trial at the expenses of the students? Mr. LIBASSI. The Government asked the schools to provide information so we could make a judgment and they refused to provide us with the information. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you think this is fair? Mr. LIBASSI. I think it is uncooperative of the school system. Mr. LIBASSI. Yes; I think segregation is unfair to the students and I think withholding Federal funds is unfair to the students. I think it is a shame when the school districts will not desegregate and deprive its students of funds. Mr. SCHERLE. This is a rumor you have heard but no foundation? Mr. LIBASSI. No; there was considerable evidence of segregation in Chicago. Mr. SCHERLE. What are you doing for the gifted child? Mr. LIBASSI. There are other programs of the Office of Education which I am not competent to testify to. Mr. SCHERLE. Aren't you with the Office of Education? Mr. LIBASSI. I am the Special Assistant to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare for Civil Rights. I was asked to testify on the Department's handling of civil rights policies and the operation of these policies particularly. Mr. SCHERLE. Who handles your programs for the gifted children? Mr. LIBASSI. Let me see if I can ask someone from the Office of Education? Mr. CAREY. Would my colleague yield? Mr. SCHERLE. Surely. Mr. CAREY. I would like to respond not on the basis of complete information but briefly, there are no gifted children programs in the Office of Education. There are programs for the handicapped children, exceptional children in that terminology and recently the new Bureau for the Handicapped was set up by a bill which passed this committee last year to gather all of the special education programs under one roof down there. Many of our strong recommendations in this regard were that we look into the different levels of achievement and find out what is being done with Federal programs to sort out the children who have both functions that prevent them from getting a full education and also there are those who are not being served. Those you call gifted children were not served by the so-called equal education programs. So this is a beginning field and we have not caught up with it. The States as you realize have a number of programs in this field but there is no Federal program for gifted children now on the books. Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Carey. There is no one who is any more concerned about the disadvantaged and the uneducated and the need for it. Because in my humble opinion there is nothing that is more important than education. I think it would be criminal for us as Congressmen or anyone in the field of education not to give every opportunity to the children today to compete in this competitive world, to give them the dignity, the opportunity and the pride to compete so they can become selfsustaining but I do think there are a lot of questions that should be answered in the field of education as to whether or not they are all being treated with the same help perhaps disadvantaged, handicapped, and so on and so forth. I have one last question. Going back to the transportation of pupils, what would you do in the Washington area here to try to set up à 50-percent attendance of children, considering the margins you have at the present time? Mr. LIBASSI. I don't believe that it is possible in the city of Washington because of the organization of the District to achieve a 50 percent or any other kind of percentage of attendance in the District schools. Mr. SCHERLE. If this is an example of what you are attempting to do, does this not sort of knock your argument in the head a little bit? Mr. LIBASSI. The only thing the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is doing, where a school district or city operates the school system in a way which increases or maintains segregation, that would violate the Constitution, but where in a city such as the District of Columbia 80 or 90 percent of the children are Negro there is not very much that a district can do. Mr. SCHERLE. If you feel this is the answer to Chicago and other places why would it not serve the same purpose in Washington? Mr. LIBASSI. In the city of Chicago there were districts or resident zones around schools which could have provided for more integration than there was. Mr. SCHERLE. But you feel that full integration of the schools is the answer to all of the problems in education? Mr. LIBASSI. I think that the object has to be the improvement of the quality of education. Mr. SCHERLE. But you feel you would obtain this by full integration of schools to the extent where you might even have to transport these children out of their neighborhood, past schools they now attend in an exchange to create a balance? Mr. LIBASSI. Let me say I think every child's constitutional right to equal educational opportunity ought to be fully protected. We have many, many instances of children being put on buses, transported past schools to attend segregated schools and this was the pattern for years where Negro children were put on buses and driven right past white schools to attend all Negro schools and people thought that was a good way to have educational systems. Mr. SCHERLE. You thought that was wrong and now you feel this is right? Mr. LIBASSI. I feel local school officials should take whatever action in their judgment increases the educational opportunity for all children in that district and if in their judgment it means children should be transported on a bus, if that is their judgment, then I think that is what should be done. Mr. SCHERLE. Is it your judgment or the assumption of this law, that if this is done you could create equality you are looking for in your Department? Mr. LIBASSI. That is not the policy of the Department. The only policy of the Department is where a local school district wants to transport children because they feel the children would get a better opportunity, then the Federal Government is not opposed to getting funds to do that. Mr. SCHERLE. You will force them to do that if you feel they are not getting the kind of education because you provide the funds to run that school. Mr. LIBASSI. We have not in any case required that in any northern school district Mr. SCHERLE. What do you call the $30 million in Chicago? Mr. LIBASSI. We did require or suggest to the school officials in Chicago that they should put-they should bus the children. We were simply at that point trying to get information. What we have required of Chicago is that they look at their zoning patterns, that they look at the lines they have drawn for schools, that they look at the feeder patterns, that they look at their faculty assignment procedures and come up with a plan that will assure there is no discrimination. Mr. SCHERLE. In other words, you had to give the Okay with the information that they afforded to you that what they did was right in your mind to provide the kind of education that they should have in a city probably about a thousand miles away from Washington. Mr. LIBASSI. There was no effort and is no effort on our part to try to run the city of Chicago public schools on the issue of race. It is far too big a problem. What we have been trying to fund and stimulate is for the local officials to work on their own plan and tell us how they want to do it. Mr. SCHERLE. In the end result you will govern how they think and how they should act. Mr. LIBASSI. Congress has told us that the Department must not provide funds if children are being discriminated against so we must assure that children are not being discriminated against or being excluded from a program. This is a direction from Congress. Mr. SCHERLE. But the school boards and the department of public instruction shall not be the determining factor of whether they are or not, you will? Mr. LIBASSI. Ultimately the courts. Mr. SCHERLE. You will. Mr. LIBASSI. We initially and then the school authorities may appeal that judgment to the courts, that is right. Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Meeds. Mr. MEEDS. I have now had an opportunity to go through your testimony and I would like to compliment you on your prepared testimony and also on your efforts to answer some very difficult questions. May I ask just generally your feeling about the transfer or the proposed transfer by some people of the Headstart program to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare? Have you people considered this in the field of civil rights at all? Mr. LIBASSI. We have been concerned that all of the preschool and special summer programs particularly which were administered by the Office of Economic Opportunity adopt and implement a civil rights policy which was consistent with what the Office of Education was requiring. As long as the programs are in the Office of Economic Opportunity, they will be and we will be following the same policy with respect to similar programs. The transition either way will not result in the civil rights policies that govern those programs. We do require complete and immediate desegregation of summer programs and special preschool programs. Mr. MEEDS. I notice in your testimony on page 7 you point out that 88 percent of the Negro children in 11 Southern States continue to attend schools where student bodies are all or nearly all Negro. 75-492-67-pt. 2- 49 Do you feel with the guidelines you presently have that if the Hearstart program were shifted to the Office of Education, that you would be able to implement your program fast enough and that we would not have the situation existing in Headstart programs? Mr. LIBASSI. I wish I could tell you I was absolutely consistent that would happen. We have sent out several letters from the Commissioner of Education to the chief, State school officers and if the committee wishes I would be glad to submit those for the record which would indicate the efforts we have made to be sure these Headstart programs remained fully desegregated. I can assure you we will insist on the same level of desegregation that OEO has required in any transition of those programs into the Office of Education. Mr. MEEDS. As a matter of fact, it is quite possible, is it not, that it would take several years even if your very excellent guidelines and the implementation of these to assure any substantial desegregation in Headstart programs were this program shifted over to the Office of Education? Mr. LIBASSI. We will not fund segregated, preschool programs. That is, if a school district, and on inspection we find this and we ask for a statistical report, if we found school districts operating segregated Headstart programs in the Office of Education we would not fund those programs and in fact the school districts would jeopardize all Federal funds if they did. We allow for a gradual desegregation of the school system but when it comes to the Headstart programs these must be operated initially and completely on a desegregated basis. There is no freedom of choice basis in Headstart programs. Mr. MEEDS. Let me compliment you on that policy. Mr. CAREY. I am very much interested in this critical discussion on the possibility of desegregation of Headstart facilities if the Department takes on a larger role in the administration of Headstart pro grams. I say you insist that Headstart programs be fully initiated. Where have you achieved this? Mr. LIBASSI. The Office of Education in the Headstart programs has required that the programs be staffed and operated in such a way as to provide for the maximum desegregation. Mr. CAREY. I am well aware with what they are doing and I am fully in accord with what they are doing but you say that in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare program that the Headstart program be desegregated from the start. Now you name me one school district where there is a desegregated pattern for Headstart where you have been successful in desegregating from the beginning? Mr. LIBASSI. I do not have it with me but I would be glad to provide the committee the percentage of segregation in Headstart programs and the desegregation in other classes so we can see these as well in comparison. Mr. CAREY. You say you will furnish information on the extent of desegregation of Headstart programs. On your testimony a few moments ago you could not have any desegregation of Headstart pro |