Historically, unemployment has been considered to be a temporary thing, something which was unpleasant but not lasting. For example, in the early days of coal mining the summer months were usually slack periods. But the miner could always look to Labor Day and the beginning of the heating season for a pickup in work time.

Similarly, during a downturn in business, a man could weather the storm with the knowledge that when business picked up his job would be there again. It was the responsibility of Government to encourage business and end the recession.

But conditions have changed. A new variable has been added to the traditional pattern of the business cycle.

This Nation must face the harsh fact that there are thousands and even millions of unemployed who will never again find jobs in the normal labor markets. The men, the unemployables, are victims of rapidly progressing technology and shifting marketing patterns. They are, for the most part, illequipped, either by temperament or education, to fit well into the modern patterns of employment.

We must realize that these men and women and their families are our No. 1 social and economic problem.

Public works programs would help solve the dilemma posed by this portion of the working force. For public works must have a high labor content. This type of activity encompasses the use of a great deal of unskilled labor, an area that any objective economist will label as the most critical.

We realize that improved technology is essential for the future of this Nation. But we also know that technology has left a great deal of human wreckage in its wake.

We can, therefore, logically ask that the men who can no longer look to normal sources of employment be utilized in the construction of vital public works.

In this way we can reconcile the necessity for rapid expansion in productivity with the social chaos that such advances so often entail.

Let me hasten to add that we do not sponsor "make work" projects of any kind. The coal miners of this Nation are proud men. They do not wish to take part in Government charity.

However, necessary public works are another matter. They provide for public service and employ men in useful labor at the same time.

Fourth, a public works program can provide the Nation with necessary public works at a relatively low cost.

Everyone will acknowledge the need for public works of various kinds. We need hospitals, we need roads, schools, recreational areas, and many other things of an essential nature.

The idea of public works in the context discussed here today would provide these services at the lowest cost and at the most propitious time.

Men out of work must be maintained in some manner, either through unemployment compensation or direct relief. This costs the taxpayers money.

A certain amount of public works projects must be undertaken. They are essential for the public welfare. This also costs the taxpayers money.

It would be logical to combine the two. The man out of work is looking for a job. The Nation needs an ever-increasing amount of public works projects. Therefore, if we can reemploy the unemployed and at the same time provide for our public needs, a double good will have been attained.

Fifth, the public works program can be used in conjunction with the depressed area legislation.

This committee is well aware of the attempts currently being made to rehabilitate our so-called depressed areas. These sections, including many coal mining communities, are in dire straits. They were a principal target of President John F. Kennedy in his election campaign.

There is currently operating within the Department of Commerce an agency called the Area Redevelopment Administration. This group is especially responsible for bringing a measure of prosperity to the depressed areas. However, there are two problems in connection with their work.

One, there are many men who are out of work for long periods of time and who are not easily reemployable, either in the local industry or in any potential industry.

We might add as an adjunct to this that very often depressed areas rely on one basic industry, such as coal. When this industry suffers for one reason or another, the entire area is depressed.

Two, the public facilities of the area often fall into decay. This means that the ability of the industry to attract new industry is weakened. In our modern economy a region must be attractive to industry and must offer the essential services if it is ever to be revived.

Public works projects would serve a twofold purpose:

First, it would employ those men who could not find other employment because of the contraction of local industry. It would take them off the relief and unemployment rolls and put them in useful work.

Second, public works would refurbish the lagging public services of an area and bring them back to tolerable standards. This would enable the region to attract industry and jobs which in the final analysis is the only sure way to wipe out the blight of widespread unemployment.

Thus, the public works program would be used in conjunction with another responsibility of the Federal Government, as a supplement to and as a means to an end.

We feel that the present legislation strengthens the administration of public works programs, In this regard we feel that it deserves the consideration of the Congress and the American public.

The major advantages of the bills under consideration here are sufficient, in our minds, to warrant their immediate passage.

First, the public works program will be put on a scientific and systematic basis.

For too long we have been content to use the scattergun approach to public works. They lie dormant during long periods of prosperity. Then when a recession looms officials begin to look for areas where work can be accomplished. Planning takes time. When it is accomplished and actual work begins, the recession is already in the critical stage.

Then, as normal recovery takes place, the public works programs are still underway. They continue during prosperity when they are not needed and when, in fact, they may serve a negative purpose at best.

What is needed is a systematic plan for our public works program, a plan that can be instituted in short order, a plan that will serve essential public needs, a plan that can be used when it is needed most, a plan that will be available to all those who are charged with the responsibility of carrying on programs of public works or unemployment activity.

We believe that this legislation serves that purpose. In effect, it will catalog all of our public needs on a realistic basis, apart from the usual hectic pace and crisis atmosphere of recession. It will systematically plan for the construction of these public works and hold them ready for institution at a short notice.

This is, to our minds, a wise and farsighted policy. It removes many of the objections to earlier projects. It brings into programs of this sort the same type of advanced planning that any business would use in planning future construction.

We commend it and we urge the Congress to make it an integral part of the law.

Second, we believe that the delegation of authority to a special agency of Government to plan public works programs will greatly speed and enhance such planning.

Too often diverse responsibility is no responsibility. When everyone is responsible, no one is responsible. This has been a shortcoming of the public works program in the past. To correct it the legislation before this committee attempts to assign a definite responsibility with a similar grant of authority. With the kind of authority we are discussing, the agency could begin to plan for the future. It could hire those who would be necessary. Technical help from industry and labor could be called upon for whatever assistance is necessary.

The agency involved can draw up uniform codes for the projects concerned. They and they alone will be responsible for these codes. No other diverse and often conflicting rules can emanate from any other Government agency to delay and disrupt the program.

In short, the procedure will be much simplified in the interest of expediting programs in the shortest possible time.

The agency, whether an existing agency of Government or a newly formed agency, will be specifically responsible for this program and will be answerable to the Executive and Congress. This method will avoid any attempt to pass

on responsibility, to unduly delay any program to account for the specific desires of many agencies of Government.

In other words, specific authority will be accompanied by specific responsibility.

Third, there are specific guidelines laid down for the initiation of the public works program outlined in the legislation.

Too often hesitation and vacillation deepen economic distress. Man is a natural optimist. He always looks for the bright side. He always expects employment to pick up, for next month's indicators to be a little better. In the meantime, we tend to wait, to do nothing.

Under the proposed law our natural optimism will be tempered with some realistic judgment. The draftters of the bills under study have made automatic the start of the public works. They take away the human factor and replace it with one of automatic reaction. In this way no recession will be allowed to progress far before antirecession measures are brought into play.

Fourth, the agency charged with public works planning will be able to use all existing Government agencies.

Such coordination will place the full resources of the Federal Government at the disposal of the agency. It will enable the agency to call upon these agencies for help and assistance, which is readily available there.

Such coordination and technical assistance is a vital part of the overall success of the program.

Fifth, the various States will be encouraged to participate to a fuller degree. This committee was privileged to hear from the Honorable David Lawrence of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on this subject earlier in these hearings, and his testimony is ample proof of the validity of this advantage.

We would like to offer our support for the request by the President for $600 million for the coming year. This request is, in our opinion, sound because of the need for many areas of this Nation for public works of a permanent nature. We would also like to urge this committee to specify the public works program in the immediate future to be concentrated in the depressed areas of this Nation, for it is of little comfort for the coal miners of America to remain unemployed while the rest of the Nation enjoys prosperity. We are sure that many of the other workers in the depressed areas of the Nation feel the same way.

There is need in depressed areas for relief, relief not only from physical need but also relief from a future that holds little but public dole and public apathy. We urge that something be done to correct this situation and we suggest that the public works program is one way to start these areas on the path to economic rehabilitation.

We are living in an age when the potential of this Nation is greater than ever before. Whether or not we ever realize this potential depends upon how we meet our problems, among them unemployment, and solve them in the best interests of the Nation as a whole.

We wish to thank this committee for the opportunity to appear here today and present our views on this most important topic.

Mr. BLATNIK. We thank you, Mr. Widman. Please express our thanks and appreciation to your distinguished president for his very precise statement of why the program is needed, why it is a justifiable one, and the effect of it on the unemployed. So many people think this is an additional expenditure of public funds. I am glad he made very clear the point that public funds are being expended now for unemployment compensation, relief, et cetera.

This is merely saying that to the extent funds could be used for the immediate short-term problem of putting people to work, it gives them the opportunity for an economic livelihood for themselves and their families, it boosts their morale and that of the entire community, to which is being added a new public facility which is badly needed and which will offer a service and useful function for many years to

come.

I thank you for a fine statement. Are there questions or comments from my right?

Mr. BURKE. Mr. Widman, on page 7 of your statement, in the second complete paragraph from the top, you are talking about the programing of public works. We find the sentence: "They"-meaning public works "continue during prosperity when they are not needed and when, in fact, they may serve a negative purpose at best."

Mr. Widman, this committee is concerned all the time with public works, ranging from river and harbor projects, some of which have been planned for 50 years, to a very systematic system of building public buildings, for example.

To what public works did you refer and which ones would you not do during time of prosperity?

Mr. WIDMAN. I think, of necessity, those that are charged with the responsibility of planning this type of work should have some leeway in using their good judgment based on experience. We make no recommendation how you might do this. We feel, however, that a planning of public works for a specific purpose, which is now to relieve a depression, that planning should be done beforehand as to what projects and catalog them in the most critical areas. I think you would agree with me that that would save us the time.

I am aware of the other public works that you are doing as an ordinary thing. I think this is supplemental thereto. I do not think it is intended to replace it so far as I understand the legislation proposed here.

Mr. BURKE. It is the intent to accelerate. You are not suggesting to the committee that based on some economic index, as is indicated, for example, in this bill, than when these indexes reach a higher level, for example, that the U.S. Army Engineers cease their flood control work or that we defer the building of public buildings that have been authorized?

Mr. WIDMAN. No, sir; I make no such recommendation. If you understood it that way, I am sure Mr. Kennedy did not intend it that way at all.

This is our suggestion to you, from my discussions with Mr. Kennedy in preparing the statement. What we need is something that is not ordinarily considered now as part of the public works program. Let us take a depressed area. They are badly in need of some facility that might attract industry to the community, or it might serve a very good purpose from a health standpoint, educational standpoint, recreation, anything you want to apply. We think they should be cataloged by whoever is vested with the responsibility of working out the public works program.

Mr. BURKE. Do you feel the manner in which these projects are being handled through the Department of Commerce in the depressed area program is a sound way to handle them?

Mr. WIDMAN. I think those two, the administrator of this section and those engaged in the distressed area problems, should certainly be working hand in hand on any type of additional public works that they are thinking about.

Mr. BURKE. Also in many of the areas where the members of your great union work and have worked in the past the problems of flood control and highway construction are extremely serious, are they not? Mr. WIDMAN. Yes, they are, sir.

Mr. BURKE. I want to make this very clear, then, that this statement about public works might serve a negative purpose, you are not suggesting that if the economic level rises, that the Congress defer those flood control or highways projects?

Mr. WIDMAN. That is right. I am not making any such suggestion. In fact, I think that when and if an opportunity for employment comes to a man who is on public works, if he is employable in this new industry, he will not stay on public works. I think he understands that as a temporary cushion to catch him on this fall. He would try to get other employment.

As I said here, we have a terrific problem, which has been added to by the displacement of men by machinery. That has added to our difficulty with respect to unemployment.

Mr. BURKE. Along those lines, I am sure you supported and are pleased with the Retraining Act which the Congress has passed. Mr. WIDMAN. That is right, sir.

Mr. BURKE. That is more likely to contribute to a long-term solution of this problem than a program of public works, is it not?

Mr. WIDMAN. I think that is right, but a program of public is the nourishment to let this particular angle grow. That is our thought there. The public works program is merely intended as a stimulant. Maybe we should call it extraordinary public works program for depression purposes alone. That would take away this regular public works program that is going on all the time, such as you mentioned by the Army Corps of Engineers, and so forth.

Mr. BURKE. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Baldwin.

Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. Widman, I think probably the number of members of your union would be a fairly accurate index of the total number of people employed in the mining industry. Would you be able to give us rough figures as to how many people today are members of your union as compared to, say, 10 years ago, just for a rough picture as to the trend?

Mr. WIDMAN. I would say practically every man engaged in mining, with some exceptions in the smaller mines operated as family functions, we have now about 170,000 to 175,000 employed. When I worked in the coal mines, which will give you a pretty good view of this thing, there were 450,000 men. I quit in 1929.

Mr. BALDWIN. That would be about 30 years ago.

Mr. WIDMAN. That is right, sir.

Mr. BALDWIN. Would you be able to tell us how much change there has been in the last 10 years?

Mr. WIDMAN. In the last 10 years I would say that half of that figure, unemployed, over 500,000, between that and 175,000, about half or better have been displaced in the last 10 years.

Mr. BALDWIN. There was about 300,000 10 years ago?

Mr. WIDMAN. Yes. Congressman, in the mining industry we have mechanized, we are the only industry in the United States that I know of that has doubled its productivity per man-day in these 10 years. Without a work stoppage, we have the highest wage scale of the industrial workers in the country. We have a pension plan. We have 66,000 miners on the Mine Workers pension.