Senator STEVENS. Mr. Gamble? It appears that Mr. Gamble is not present. We will move along to the next witness, Mr. Frain, who will be followed by Mr. Fuss. STATEMENT OF GEORGE FRAIN, SECRETARY, BUSINESSMAN AFFECTED SEVERELY BY THE YEARLY ACTION PLANS, INC. ACCOMPANIED BY PHILIP J. BROWN, PRESIDENT, BASYAP Senator STEVENS. Mr. Frain. Mr. FRAIN. I would like first to introduce myself. My name is George Frain. I am secretary of a small business group, Businessmen Affected Severely by the Yearly Action Plans, Inc. I am a retired congressional aide. I was up here for 20 years and I am very familiar with the Pennsylvania Avenue plans. I am accompanied by Philip J. Brown, president of our organization. I want to give a minute or two of my time to him in just a second. PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION We strongly oppose the $26 million budget item requested by President Ford for the Pennsylvania Avenue Corporation. We oppose this item and we oppose any funds to continue the Corporation business. I was on Capitol Hill for 20 years and watched this plan develop from 1962. I have testified on it and so has Mr. Brown. We do advise you now we strongly endorse the position taken by the House of Representatives on March 15 this year in rejecting the authorizing legislation, H.R. 7743, by a vote of 201 to 149 in rollcall No. 105. We are especially pleased to note that the members of the House Subcommittee on Appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies voted 3 to 1 against the authorizing legislation. Voting against H.R. 7743 were: Representative Long, Maryland; Representative McKay; Representative Murtha; Representative Regula; Representative Evans from Colorado; and Representative McDade. Voting for the authorizing bill were: Representative Yates and Representative Duncan, Oregon. Representative Taylor of North Carolina pointed out that the history of the Federal concern for Pennsylvania Avenue dates back nearly 15 years to the initial expression of interest by President Kennedy. Representative Taylor noted that in November of 1974 the completed plan was submitted to the Congress, that implementation of the plan would cost about $130 million of Federal funds over the next 15 years, and that over $400 million in private funds will also be required. There are several things that need to be poined out to the Subcommittee on Appropriations today. I met with Congresswoman Virginia Smith of Nebraska at 9:30 this morning and she gave me her statement of December 11, 1975 on the conference report on H.R. 7743 making appropriations for the Department of Interior and Related Agencies including the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation available. I call your attention to her statement and her questions answered by Chairman Sidney Yates. All of this appears on page H12330 and I ask that her statement of December 11, 1975 and the replies of Chairman Sidney Yates be included in the hearing record at this point in my testimony. For your convenience, Mr. Brown will submit them to the committee. [The information follows:] CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE December 11, 1975 H 12330 (Mrs. SMITH of Nebraska asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I too support the conference report, but I do want to express my concern about the section which provides $800,000 for the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Plan. While it is desirable to beautify our Nation's Capital by renovating Pennsylvania Avenue, it would be unwise and unnecessary to implement this goal by further commitment of Federal funds. The Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation, for whose salaries and administrative expenses this money would be used, has fulfilled its legislative charter by drafting a plan for redevelopment of the blighted area. Involving Federal funds in that effort, however, would be fiscally irresponsible in light of a shocking projected Federal deficit of $72 billion for fiscal year 1976 according to U.S. Treasury Department figures. American taxpayers will pay over $37 billion in interest alone this year on the immense national debt. Furthermore, it would be. simply poor timing to add more Federal funds to inflationary fires for a corporation which has already fulfilled its function. In addition, there is no assurance that any major financial commitment to this project will not create another bottomless pit into which we pour taxpayers' dollars. We need not look too far to see examples of budget-breaking construction overruns in our Capital. The Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts was estimated to cost $46 million before construction in 1964; today expenditures have already soared to $73 million-double the original amount and the books still are not closed. The National Visitors Center was originally estimated to cost only $16 million. The most recent figures reveal $48.3 million as the current estimate to complete the Center-three times the initial sum and in this case there have been cut-backs in the original design. So for three times the money, the taxpayers will get less than they first bargained for. This program would like to start with $154 million. Where would it end? The faintest whisper could cause another funding landslide. -Let me reiterate that I do not oppose beautifying our Nation's Capital, but the private sector should be allowed to accomplish this. These improvements could be financed by private investment under the time-tested market system. And there are already in existence authorlties which could oversee these improvements to insure that they remain faithful to the dignity which should characterize our Capital, such as the National Capital Planning Commission and National Capital Parks Service. The taxpaying American public does not now need to spend more money to perpetuate another Federal agency overseeing the sound development of our Nation's Capital. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask some questions of the chairman in regard to this. Following approval of this appropriation, if the Congress should vote not to continue the Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation, then would these funds revert to the U.S. Treasury? Mr. YATES. The answer to that question is "Yes." Mrs. SMITH of Nebraska. I thank the gentleman very much. The second question is, Could this Pennsylvania Avenue Development Corporation spend these funds at the present time, since there is no authorization? Mr. YATES. The answer to that is that these funds are primarily for the payment of salaries for the people who are on the payroll. In the event that the President does not sign the bill, the money will then not be availalbe. Mrs. SMITH of Nebraska. I am thinking, in the event that the Interior Committee should come out with a recommendation that we discontinue this program Mr. YATES. May I say to the gentlewoman the authorization is before each of the appropriate committees, but has not passed either the House or the Senate. I would say that, in my judgment, the funds could be spent only to maintain the present force for keeping this corporation operating until the Congress has an opportunity to consider the authorization. Mrs. SMITH of Nebraska. Then I would be correct in understanding that they could not make any commitments of this money for the future? Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman is correct. It is the intention of the conferees that no additional commitments be made until the further life of this corporation be approved by the Congress and by the President. Mrs. SMITH of Nebraska. I thank the gentleman. |