know he joins me in the hope that they can be included with some that is in his area.

I represent 22 counties and 20 of them are in there, and two of them are out. There is no reason for the two to be out. There is every reason for them to be in.

In conclusion, let me say to this committee that I am for the extension and continuation of this legislation. I think that Congress has done no single act which has provided greater opportunity for opening up both the great latent natural resources and for providing opportunity thereby to develop the human resources and make them full contributors to the economy of this Nation.

I thank you for recognizing me.

Mr. JONES. Thank you.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. JONES. Mr. Edmondson.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Just one question. Can the gentleman inform us whether the Appalachian Commission has made a new recommendation with reference to the addition of those counties?

Mr. LANDRUM. I cannot inform you as to what the Commission per se has done with regard to this. I can inform only that the Georgia representatives on that Commission are enthusiastic and have been enthusiastic for the inclusion of these two counties.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Do you know whether they have submitted it to the Commission?

Mr. LANDRUM. I understand that they have because I have in this file a letter from the Governor's executive secretary saying that that has been done.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Thank you.

Mr. JONES. Mr. Dorn.

Mr. DORN. I would like. Mr. Chairman, to welcome my distinguished, able, and illustrative colleague from Georgia before the committee this morning. He represents for the area across the Savannah River from my own congressional district for virtually over half its length and the rest of it is my friend and Congressman Stephens from Georgia. And I can say to the committee that the gentleman does have a very good case here for adding Hart and Elbert Counties. I want to thank you for coming before the committee.

Mr. LANDRUM. Thank you.

Mr. JONES. Any further questions?

Mr. JONES. Our next witness is Congressman Robert Stephens who has introduced H.R. 9003. Mr. Stephens really is Mr. Appalachia. He is a mountaineer himself. We really cannot refer to him as a hillbilly. You are a mountaineer actually, are you not? Glad to have you. STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT C. STEPHENS, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

Mr. STEPHENS. I certainly will acknowledge that for purposes of argument here that I am from the Piedmont region anyway, which is the foothills of the mountains.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I appreciate you letting me go ahead of my colleague, Mr. Stratton, because it fits in

better right here for me to follow Mr. Landrum so that you will understand how all the problems supplement one another and to point out that I have asked that six counties of my district be added to this Appalachian area.

This is the main reason that it is a justifiable request. There are nine counties that form what we have designated as the Northeast Georgia Area Planning and Development Commission. This is a group that will work together around an economic center. Now as Mr. Landrum pointed out to you, Elbert County and Hart County are part of the economic center around Mr. Dorn's--one of his economic centers in Anderson, S.C.; and if you are going to plan a comprehensive and extensive help system for an area, then the nine counties that are together for planning purposes only three of them are in the Appalachian system of development-and I would like to ask that the six counties that are designated in my bill be added to the Appalachian area. I am not asking you to do anything to take them out of the area. They are basically in Appalachia. They are right in the foothills of the mountains, right in the heart of or tailend, so to speak, of the Appalachian section..

The Governor of the State has approved this in the same fashion that Mr. Landrum has pointed out to you.

I have one further thing that Mr. Landrum is asking that the two counties be put in. I am delighted that those two counties that he is asking for, Hart and Elbert, be added. I had the privilege of representing them over several years and would like to see them included and know their needs.

The other thing that I would like to point out to you is that the three counties that are in this planning area that are adjacent to and work together with these other six counties that I am asking to come in are all in Mr. Landrum's district already. So he has the three counties there; and it is not really a conflict of interest, but planning can be done better if these counties that have a common economic interest could be worked in together and worked so that they can have the advantages of the Appalachian designation, which they deserve. (Mr. Edmondson assumed the chair.)

Mr. EDMONDSON. I thank the gentleman for a very fine statement. Any questions on my right? Questions on my left?

Mr. SCHWENGEL. I do not have any questions, but I have a comment. Many Members of Congress do not know that this man before us was the very worthy successor of the great man in our history who served in the Congress here and with Abe Lincoln worked for internal improvement of this Nation. They were from the same parties, they were both Whig. Later this man went on to be Vice President of the Confederacy, later also he came back to the Congress. Is that not. right?

Mr. STEPHENS. After the war, yes.

Mr. SCHWENGEL. He has served this great land fighting for the same things that his great-uncle fought for many years ago, before the Civil War. Both dedicated to building a greater country. I know also this man's great interest in history, his feel for things that are right and just. It is good to have you here and hear your testimony, a very fine presentation.

Mr. STEPHENS. Thank you very much.

Mr. EDMONDSON. Do you know whether this proposal for the six counties in your district has been submitted to the Appalachian Commission, and if so do you know whether the Appalachian Commission has made a recommendation with regard to it?

Mr. STEPHENS. I believe that it has, and I have asked that the letter of the Governor of March 6, in a letter to Mr. Fallon, chairman of the whole Public Works Committee, be made a part of this hearing. I would like to repeat that request. And I am sure that whatever machinery is necessary for this approval has been requested by the State. Mr. DORN. Mr. Chairman, I welcome my distinguished colleague from Georgia, and I might say this, that I live close enough to the Georgia line to know that, and I might say, Mr. Schwengel, I have a brother named Stephens, but I do have two named after the distinguished Georgia statesmen Henry Grady and Senator Watson. I will say Georgia is the largest State east of the Mississippi River, and it has been a great responsibility of the great people of that State to maintain roads. I think perhaps Georgia has more rural area than any State east of the Mississippi River also and perhaps more in the Appalachian region, more area. Therefore, most of this money does go to access roads.

I know of no area where it is greater needed than in north Georgia where they have had a lot of erosion over the years and the need for opening up various access roads. So I appreciate hearing my distinguished colleagues coming before the committee this morning.

Mr. STEPHENS. I appreciate the reception that we have been given and want to tell you that I have supported this program and will continue to do so because I think it is a fine thing.

(Mr. Jones assumed the chair.)

Mr. STEPHENS. I will continue to support it whether you put my counties in or not.

Mr. JONES. Without objection, the letter which the witness has offered will be printed in the record at this point.

(The letter refererd to follows:)

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
Atlanta, March 6, 1967.

Hon. ROBERT STEPHENS,

Member of Congress, House Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN STEPHENS: It has come to my attention that there has been some expression of local interest from the counties of Clarke, Greene, Morgan, Oconee, Oglethorpe, and Walton that these six counties be added to the designated Appalachian Region. These six counties along with Barrow, Jackson and Madison (which are already designated as Appalachian Counties) comprise the nine-county Northeast Georgia Area Planning and Development Commission. I believe that these six counties would meet any logical criteria established for Appalachian designation, especially since they make up two-thirds of a multi-county commission of which one-third is already designated as Appalachian. If you concur in this matter, I would like to indicate to you my support for including these six counties within the Region.

It has also come to my attention that consideration should be given to including Hart and Elbert counties of the Ninth Congressional District in the Appalachian Region, in order to correct what must have been an oversight in the original Appalachian legislation. If you feel it appropriate, I would like to suggest that this matter be discussed with Congressman Landrum with the understanding that you have the cooperation and support of the Governor's Office in action to add these counties to the Appalachian Region.

I would like to again indicate my support for any efforts you might make before Congress to include the counties of Clarke, Greene, Morgan, Oconee, Oglethorpe, and Walton in the Appalachian Region, as well as action that might be taken toward including the counties of Hart and Elbert. With kind personal regards, I am

Sincerely,

Mr. JONES. Again I thank you, Mr. Stephens.
Mr. STEPHENS. Thank you.

LESTER MADDOX, Governor.

Mr. JONES. Our next witness is our colleague from Kentucky, the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, who has always taken such a great interest in the development of this program, and it is always good to have you, Mr. Perkins.

STATEMENT OF HON. CARL D. PERKINS, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Mr. PERKINS. The chairman and members of the committee, perhaps I am as much conscious of the great need for this program as any other member because I am right in the heart of the Appalachia district that goes through within 50 miles of Cincinnati and 50 miles of Tennessee, and we have been isolated from the mainstream of the econ

omy

Mr. JONES. Some 3 months ago I was on a subcommittee that was visiting part of your area and saw firsthand the conditions that exist and can appreciate the observations you are making.

Mr. PERKINS. We have benefited up to this stage of the game perhaps more so from the vocational education program that any other program authorized in the Appalachian bill; but I am vitally concerned about the road program, that is the reason that I introduced the legislation, a bill, after conferring with representatives of the bill for public roads which provides for more money.

In Kentucky we have very little mileage under the Appalachian program, but it is to the extent that is authorized under construction. And you know, up until July 1966, 17 percent of the cost of construction was paid for by the Federal Government under the Appalachian program. But after that time, they have encouraged the acquisition of right-of-way and the advanced engineering on a 70-30 basis, but actual construction on a 50-50 basis.

If my recollection serves me correctly, and if we are going to fourlane these main highways, which we must, if we are going to have effective road program and put these areas into the mainstream of the economy, it is going to take, in my judgment, more money than is proposed to be authorized in the administration bill.

What has been done thus far has been a great beginning, but I feel we have been trying to solve the vast problem with small means. We need to build roads, four-lane roads to open the areas up. We need sewer systems and water systems so that the communities of Appalachia can build college dormitories, resort hotels, and factories. We need to provide hospitals and health centers.

The administration bill authorizes 2,700 miles of main artery highways, which is 350 more than was authorized in the 1965 act. The bill that I introduced authorizes the same mileage, and both bills propose to authorize 1,000 miles of access roads.

To four-lane these main artery highways it would take $942 million more than is presently mentioned in the Fallon bill. I think if you discuss this with the representatives of the Bureau of Public Roads, you will get that figure. That is the figure that I got from their representatives, which would make a total of $1,957 million. The additional money in my bill would go principally to four-laning or six-laning up to 2,000 miles of highways.

I thought that unless we go beyond two-lane roads, we would be building, not for the present, not for the future, but for the past.

The Senate bill made a slight addition to the highway mileage. The 1965 authorization was $840 million over a 6-year period to build 2.350 miles of development highways and 1,000 miles of access roads. Of that $840 million 6-year authorization, $300 million was appropriated for the fiscal years 1966 and 1967.

The Senate bill increases the highway authorization by $75 million. It provides $140 million for 350 additional miles across lower New York State and a connecting link in Pennsylvania. It allocates $35 million to local access roads with the mileage limitation increased from 1,000 to 2,000 miles.

For projects other than highways, my measure calls for expenditures over a 2-year period that would be $762,350,000 larger than provided in the administration bill. This is primarily for water and sanitation, which the Appalachian area so vitally needs.

Of course, it takes into consideration hospitals and health centers, the reason I make the extra figure.

I do not want to take anymore of your time, Mr. Chairman, but this bill means so much to the Nation and especially to the district that I represent that I would like to see all these programs with a longer duration than they presently authorized, 26 or 27 months, so that I believe it would lend more stability and that the heart of Appalachia could take greater advantage of the programs if you could come up with the longer authorization because it is in these areas where we have the least technical assistance. The larger towns can take advantage of these programs and do take advantage much sooner than the smaller communities, and that is the reason I ask for a longer authorization.

I am a great believer in this program, and I hope that we can get it through the Congress at the earliest possible date with some additions along the lines that I have suggested.

Thank you.

Mr. JONES. Thank you very much. Any questions?

Mr. PERKINS, I want to ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.

Mr. JONES. Without obiection.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT BY HON, CARL D. PERKINS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM KENTUCKY

Mr. Chairman, I appear on behalf of Appalachian extension legislation in general and on behalf svecifically of the measure I introduced-which is H.R. 5472. There are several bills before your groun. All have the same goal which is to improve the economie lot of the people who live in the 12-state mountain region of the Eastern United States.

I am glad, as I am sure most of you are, that the Senate gare so wide a margin of approval to its version of the Appalachian extension bill. The vote there on April 26 was 68 to 13