because we have not mentioned them in these hearings we are not grateful for what they do; we appreciate your point of view and we appreciate their point of view. Nevertheless it is frequently very important for the facts to be known in order to stimulate the right attitude, and that is our only purpose.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Doctor.
Mr. W. R. Ogg.

STATEMENT of w. R. OGG, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU

FEDERATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. OGG. My name is W. R. Ogg. I am in charge of the Washington office of the American Farm Bureau Federation, which is a national organization of farmers supported by membership dues, with State farm bureaus in 39 States and Puerto Rico, representing approximately 1,500,000 farm people in its membership.

The CHAIRMAN. I have been asking each of the witnesses, if they have a statement that they can file, to please do so, since we are trying to get through this afternoon, and that will help us very much.

Mr. OGG. I am glad you mentioned that, Senator, because I was just going to ask permission to file a statement for President O'Neal who was unable to be here today because of a hearing before the House Committee on Agriculture, on general farm legislation. We have quite a number of witnesses over there today in those hearings and it was impossible for him to get away. But I would, with your consent, like to file later a statement on behalf of President O'Neal and also a statement on behalf of Mrs. Mies, the president of the Associated Women of the American Farm Bureau Federation, which represents more than half a million rural farm women.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have both statements and we will ask that they be given to us as soon as possible.

Mr. OGG. Thank you.

With respect to S. 1313, I might explain briefly for your information here today that we are in accord with the general objective and purpose of the bill to equalize educational opportunities between the States. If there is anything further that you can do to strengthen the language in the statement of policy, and the language with respect to the apportionment of money, so that there will be no doubt but that the money will be apportioned on the basis of financial need and the basis of educational need, we urge that this be done, because that is the primary thing to be kept in mind in a program of this sort. Senator ELLENDER. Have you any specific suggestions you can make in that direction?

Mr. OGG. Well, I don't know that I have at this time. I think the language is fairly good there but I hope the committee will study that and see if there is anything further that can be done to strengthen it. It does seem to me that it could be strengthened a little more.

Last year there was a formula in the bill but it was rather intricate and involved. If some equitable formula could be devised that could accomplish it, perhaps that would be desirable, but I haven't got anything to suggest at this time.

Senator ELLENDER. Those separate formulas are usually hard to draw, you know?

Mr. OGG. Yes, but it does seem to me that anything you can do to safeguard further the apportionment of the money, would be highly desirable. It does seem to me that the language is pretty good there but I believe it could be further strengthened.

There is this further general comment. In respect to the apportionment of money, the primary emphasis should be upon the need in the rural areas. Now the defense needs are temporary in relation to the long time needs. The care of migrant children is a very minor problem compared to the total educational problem. The children on Federal reservations are a very, very minor problem in the total picture.

Therefore, those two things should not stand on the same footing as aid to rural areas for the support of elementary and secondary education. The big objective should be to provide funds that will equalize educational opportunity for elementary and secondary education as a permanent policy and program, and anything that this committee can do to assure that that will be given proper treatment and emphasis, I believe will be very constructive.

The CHAIRMAN. I think there is no doubt but what that is our aim, Mr. Ogg, so we will do our best.

Mr. OGG. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Ogg.

(Mr. Ogg subsequently filed the following statements on behalf of Mr. O'Neal and Mrs. Mies:)

STATEMENT OF MRS. ELSIE W. MIES, PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATED WOMEN OF AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION

On behalf of the Associated Women of the American Farm Bureau Federation, representing more than one-half million farm women in 39 States who are members of this organization, I wish to endorse the objectives of S. 1313 to provide Federal grants-in-aid to the States on a basis that will equalize educational opportunity. The greatest inequalities in educational opportunities exist in the rural areas. This is not because farm people do not want better school facilities, but because of the lack of sufficient tax resources to support adequate educational facilities. The fact is, farm people are making a greater sacrifice to maintain inadequate facilities than the urban areas, which enjoy far superior educational facilities. In nearly every State the rural areas have to educate proportionately a far greater number of children than the urban areas, according to a study made by the Advisory Committee on Education, appointed by President Roosevelt, to study the educational problem in the United States, from which I quote:

"The farm people not only have a relatively large number of children to support and educate, but they must also carry that load on incomes which average much lower than those of city people. In 1930 the farm population was responsible for the care and education of 31 percent of the Nation's children, but farmers received only 9 percent of the national income. In the Southeastern region, the farm group had the care of approximately 4,250,000 children, age 5 to 17, with only 2 percent of the national income. At the other extreme, the nonfarm population of the Northeast, with approximately 8,500,000 children, age 5 to 17, had 42 percent of the national income-21 times as much income with which to educate only 2 times as many children."—The Federal Government and Education, page

10.

The people living in the cities have a vital stake in improving the educational facilities in the rural areas, because of the fact that about 30 percent of the young people living on farms eventually move to the cities and towns. During the 10-year period ending in 1930, approximately 60 percent of all the people leaving the farms came from farms south of the Mason and Dixon line. It is vitally important to the welfare of the urban areas that the youth supplied from the farms to the cities receive proper education.

Under our present system of financial support of education a disproportionate share of the burden falls upon farm people. For example, Dr. O. E. Baker of the United States Department of Agriculture, has estimated that "the cost to the

farming people of feeding, clothing, and educating the more than 6,000,000 farm people, mostly youth, who left the farms during the decade before the depression and did not return, at least during that decade, may be estimated at approximately $14,000,000,000."

The only way these conditions can be corrected is to provide a system of Federal grants-in-aid to the States and then support our elementary and secondary education on a basis to the extent necessary to equalize educational opportunity.

Rural autonomy should be preserved to the States in formulating and carrying out their educational programs within the States.

In the proposed bill, S. 1313, we insist that every possible safeguard be provided to assure that Federal funds will be allocated to the States on a basis that will most effectively equalize educational opportunity. If an equitable formula to accomplish this cannot be written into the bill, we believe it is highly essential that the proposed Board which is to be set up to determine the basis for allotment of the funds should be given the greatest possible mandate from Congress to apportion the money on a basis that will equalize educational opportunity.

We believe also that primary emphasis should be given in any such legislation to grants-in-aid for the support of elementary and secondary education, as this is the primary task that needs to be done. Inasmuch as the greatest inequalities exist in the rural areas, we believe that agriculture should be properly represented on the proposed Board of Apportionment; and because of the close relationship between the farm home and the education and training of our children and youth, we recommend that a farm woman be included in the membership of this Board.

STATEMENT OF EDWARD A. O'NEAL, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU

FEDERATION

The gross inequalities of educational opportunity existing at the present time in the United States are shocking and disgraceful. Unless corrected, they constitute a serious menace to the economic program and to the maintenance of democracy. We are being handicapped seriously in the present national-defense program because of the lack of trained workers.

This is a problem of Nation-wide concern. Our Nation is founded upon the fundamental principle of equal opportunity for all. It is a tragic and intolerable situation which denies to millions of our children the opportunity to receive anything more than the minimum meager education and preparation for life merely because they happen to have been born in areas where economic resources are the lowest and the educational load is the greatest; while the children who happen to live in the areas where the educational load is the lightest and the revenues are the largest to enjoy the highest educational advantages.

On the whole, the greatest inequalities of educational opportunity exist in the rural areas. They have a much larger percentage of school children in proportion to the total population and, in general, they have the least financial resources with which to support the educational facilities.

The rural areas are not able to maintain adequate educational facilities out of available tax resources without undue hardship. Even though the facilities now available in rural areas are greatly inferior to those in the urban areas, farm people are making a far greater sacrifice to maintain educational facilities than the urban areas. On this point I wish to quote the following conclusion reached by the Advisory Committee on Education, appointed by President Roosevelt, which made an extensive study of the educational problem:

"Although the amounts actually spent vary a great deal, they do not differ as much as the ability to spend. In other words, the States best able to raise funds are in general making less-than-average effort to support education, while the States least able to raise funds are with few exceptions taxing themselves more heavily and spending more on education in proportion to their resources than more well-to-do States.

"It is to the credit of the States of low taxpaying ability that most of them rank near the top in the effort they make to provide funds for schools. Despite this effort, however, they rank at the bottom in the quality of schooling provided. Although the States having the least ability to support education tend to make the greatest effort in proportion to ability, even with such effort, they are unable to support education at anything like the level attained, with less-than-average effort, by the States more able financially."

A recent study of taxation made by the economics staff of Iowa State College at the request of the American Farm Bureau Federation, shows that agriculture

317387-41-23

as an industry is paying a greater percentage of its income for taxes than any other group in America except public utilities and, of course, they pass their taxes on to the consumers. I quote the following excerpt from this study:

"Already agriculture as an industry pays 24 percent of the income it produces as business (mostly property taxes) taxes according to Tarasov and Colm in Temporary National Economic Committee Monograph No. 3. This is more than the amount paid by any other industry except public utilities." The cost of education is a large item in local taxes paid by farmers.

In order to correct this situation the American Farm Bureau Federation, for a decade, has been advocating Federal grants-in-aid to the States for the support of elementary and secondary education.

At the last annual meeting of the federation, held in Baltimore, Md., last December, an earlier resolution of the federation on this subject was reaffirmed, which was as follows:

"We advocate the policy of Federal financial participation in the cost of rural education to the extent only that such financial support on the part of the National Government will tend to effect an equalization of educational opportunity."

On behalf of the federation, which represents approximately 11⁄2 million farm people in its membership in 39 States and Puerto Rico, I wish to endorse the objective of S. 1313 to provide Federal grants-in-aid to the States, provided such aid is extended on the basis that it will equalize educational opportunities among the States.

We believe an equitable formula should be devised to carry out this objective. Such a formula should provide that the States which have the least financial resources to support education and have the greatest educational load will receive the largest share of the funds that are made available. The States which have the greater financial resources and less educational load should share proportionately less in these funds.

If the committee should find it impracticable to include such a formula in this legislation, we insist that the apportionment of these funds to the States by safeguarded by:

(1) Providing a mandate in clearest terms to the proposed board of apportionment which will require it to develop such a formula so as to provide for the apportionment of funds to the States on a basis that will most effectively equalize educational opportunity among the States; and

(2) That agriculture be properly represented on such board of apportionment inasmuch as the main inequalities in educational opportunities exist in rural areas. Such legislation should be devoted primarily to equalizing educational opportunity in elementary and secondary education. The education of children on Federal reservations and children of migratory workers constitutes only a very small portion of the total problem. Funds allocated for such purposes should be kept in proper proportion. The educational problems connected with the nationaldefense program are only temporary in character. This should be kept in mind in such legislation.

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Margaret Worrell.

STATEMENT OF MRS. MARGARET H. WORRELL, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITIZENS ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mrs. WORRELL. My name is Mrs. Margaret Hopkins Worrell, and I represent the Columbia Heights Citizens' Association, the oldest and one of the largest citizens' associations in the District of Columbia; and I am also national legislative chairman of the Ladies of the G. A. R., numbering, together with our allies, about 400,000 members throughout the United States.

Our organizations have given considerable study to educational bills that have been introduced in Congress from time to time along this same line, and have gone on record against the same. This bill, S. 1313, insofar as section 1, Findings of Facts, and section 2, Statement of Policy, are concerned, would be approved; but when we turn to section 3, Appropriation Authorized, in which it is provided that any State in need of funds for the education of its children as set forth in

sections 1 and 2 must "have accepted the provisions of this act and have complied therewith," and we study the provisions of the act, we object to the bill.

While this act seems to give local and State jurisdiction, it appears to be so written as to give control of education to the Federal Government. On page 15, section 13, clause (c), under the title "Miscellaneous," the United States Commissioner of Education is given absolute powers, and in clause (b) teachers and administrators are protected in their efforts to bring about a "new social order." This clause

states:

No political or civil rights or activities of any teacher or school administrator shall be restricted or affected in any way because of any financial benefit accruing to such teacher or administrator from funds appropriated pursuant to this act.

Civil and political rights are not ordinarily denied any person except criminals. Then why was this clause necessary except to cover up the word "activities" and give teachers and administrators a free course of action?

The bill does not specify what kind of activities-it may be subversive activities or activities looking toward a change in our Government, and should this become a law any State that accepts the provisions of this bill would not be able to investigate the subversive activities of teachers, such as is now being done in the State of New York, and which will probably be followed by several other States.

In order to show our realization of the meaning of this protection of the "activities of teachers and school administrators" I quote the statement made in 1911 of Katherine Blake, in an address before the National Board of Education, in declaring that a unified plan could get whatever they wanted "because whatever the National Education Association wants it can have. We teachers have the children, so we may say we have the game in our hands, if we will only put our minds to it."

The CHAIRMAN. She turned out to be a rather bad prophet, didn't she?

Mrs. WORRELL. Yes; up to the present, but they "have the game in their hands."

The program and experiments of the planners moved fast after the war. By 1928 their strength was sufficiently unified so that the leaders of Progressive Education made a public declaration to take patriotism out of the schools, and in 1933 they issued a proclamation that "if the teachers are to play a positive and creative role in building a new social order they will have to emancipate themselves from the business interests of the Nation," to put it plainly, they were to usurp the right as to what should be taught the child, so the complaint of parents to local school boards would be of no avail. This emancipation has been so complete that few people, even today, realize who have been the promoters of our economic and political fallacies.

The experimentation of the social sciences has proven so successful in the special experimentation schools and radical labor colleges that it is now proposed that the public schools revamp their entire curriculum so as to emphasize the social ends. Old loyalties and historical facts must be relegated to the ash pile.

The originator of the radical Des Moines forums, and those in Washington is the Commissioner of Education of the United States