« ПретходнаНастави »
course, where a large building is to be constructed in a city that serves a city composed of several Congressional Districts? I want to except such projects as those. You might take Los Angeles, fo instance, where $6,000,000 will be required for a building, but tha building will serve the entire city composed of several congressiona districts. Under those conditions, there is no reason why eac District should be specifically recognized. Excepting such instance as that, how much will be required to provide a building in each congressional district? I will ask the question direct, asking you fo present purposes to disregard the Budget.
Admiral PEOPLES. We have very carefully and thoroughly sur veyed the situation, and, in order to distribute those building equitably throughout the United States, we would require $58,000,000 The CHAIRMAN. That means insuring a building in practically every district in the United States, and it would help, to some extent unemployment in the building trades.
Admiral PEOPLES. Yes, sir; it will to a very considerable extent. The CHAIRMAN. And it will be a pretty equitable distribution of the funds.
Admiral PEOPLES. It will be an equitable distribution, considering of course, the needs of the Government, and considering the fact that there are places like Los Angeles where there will be projects of considerable size that would be considered for the benefit of the community as a whole, regardless of the number of congressional districts within the limits of the city.
The CHAIRMAN. That sum of $58,000,000 for the next fiscal year would do the job as we have outlined it? Admiral PEOPLES. Yes, sir.
DISPOSITION OF $65,000,000 APPROPRIATION MADE BY EMERGENCY APPROPRIATION ACT OF JUNE 19, 1934
The CHAIRMAN. $65,000,000 was provided by the last Congress was it not?
Admiral PEOPLES. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. What did you do with it?
Admiral PEOPLES. The Emergency Appropriation Act, approved June 19, 1934, made available $65,000,000 for emergency construction of public buildings outside of the District of Columbia. The act provides that the projects be selected by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General, acting jointly, from lists of buildings in statements 2 and 3 appearing in House Report 1879, Seventy-third Congress, second session.
Statements 2 and 3 referred to in the original House Report 1879 contain 793 projects with limits of cost aggregating $152,638,000, The $65,000,000 appropriated by the act of June 19, 1934, represented approximately 42 percent of the total amount required for all projects listed in the report.
During the hearings last December on the Treasury Department appropriation bill for 1936 considerable information was furnished the committee as to the status of projects authorized under the emergency building program authorized by the act of June 19, 1934. (See pp. 531 to 584, inclusive.)
I would like to submit to your committee a report addressed to the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, signed by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General, which is a uggested revision of House Report 1879. Statement 1 of this revised port shows projects selected under the $65,000,000 program, and ojects not authorized to date. Statement 2 is a list of projects Thich have been submitted to the Treasury and Post Office Departents for consideration under any new public-building program. The revised House Report 1879 shows 343 projects selected with imits of cost totaling $64,980,000; 518 projects remaining in House. Report 1879 requiring limits of cost aggregating $88,668,500; and 635 Additional projects not in House Report 1879 which are now being investigated and studied to determine the necessity and comparative rgency therefor. The total number of projects, therefore, which would be eligible for consideration under any new program is 1,153, total estimated amount $136,293,500.
The number of projects which may be authorized under any new program will depend on the amount of funds made available. There are a number of large projects remaining in House Report 1879 which should be given consideration in the near future. Large rentals are being paid in most of these cities and the need for additional space is urgent.
Your attention is also invited to 16 cases listed in the revised House Report 1879, where an increase in the limit of cost is considered necessary in order to permit the award of contracts on bids already taken or to allow for the additional space demands of the various Federal agencies since the project was first selected. Respecting these cases there is submitted for the record data showing the present limit of cost, the proposed limit of cost, and the reason for the increase in each case.
Statement no. 1 is right here. It sets forth in detail the State, community, purpose, and character of the project, the amount which has been authorized and appropriated under the $65,000,000 act, and the remaining communities which have not yet been authorized to date. The totals represent 343 projects selected out of the $65,000,000, with a total allocation of $64,980,000. Practically all of it is allocated. Those estimated for to date number 518, with a total estimated cost of $88,668,500.
The CHAIRMAN. They are in Document No. 1879.
Admiral PEOPLES. Yes, sir; revised up to date.
The CHAIRMAN. Revised up to date so far as the projects named are concerned.
Admiral PEOPLES. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. But it does not mean a revision up to date so far as new projects are concerned.
Admiral PEOPLES. No, sir.
SUGGESTED REVISION OF EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILD ING PROJECTS CONTAINED IN DOCUMENT 1879, 73D CONGRESS
The CHAIRMAN. This is statement no. 1, and it may go into the record.
(Said statement is as follows:)
STATEMENT No. 1. SUGGESTED REVISION H. R. REPORT 1879
Hon. JAMES P. BUCHANAN,
Chairman House Appropriations Committee,
United States Capitol.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Emergency Appropriation Act approved June 19, 1934, authorized an expenditure of $65,000,000 for public building construction outside the District of Columbia, and directed the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General to select from the projects specified in House Report 1879 the places where construction should be undertaken and to carry out such projects within the respective estimated or proposed limits of costset forth in the report.
In order to permit an equitable distribution of projects throughout the country, Congress further authorized the selection of projects not listed in House Report 1879, which in the judgment of the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General were economically sound and advantageous to the public service.
On December 13, 1934, a report was made to the committee, setting forth the projects authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury and Postmaster General under the authority contained in the Emergency Appropriation Act, approved June 19, 1934, the progress made by the two departments in the prosecution of the program and the several changes made in the character of projects or limits of cost which appeared advisable after reinvestigation.
We are now submitting for the information of the Congress a suggested revision of House Report 1879, Seventy-third Congress, second session, which shows as of April 12, 1935, the projects selected under the $65,000,000 appropriation and the projects not yet authorized.
The original Report 1879 listed 793 projects with limits of cost aggregating $152,638,000. This revision of the report shows a total of 861 projects with limits of cost amounting to $153,648,500 and includes 68 projects with limits of cost totaling $3,756,000, which were not listed in the original report.
During the past year numerous changes have been requested by the several departments and independent offices in the amount of space desired in Federal buildings. Wherever possible, space adjustments have been made within the existing limit of cost. In other cases where the present limit of cost appears insufficient, new limits have been recommended in the revision of House Report 1879. As a few of these latter cases concern projects already authorized under the $65,000,000 program, it will be necessary to secure amendatory legislation increasing the limits of cost before proceeding further with the project. In each individual case the necessity for the increase is set forth in a separate statement accompanying this report.
It should be noted that the list of projects remaining for consideration contain several large and meritorious cases which deserve early attention. Such cases were deferred only because of the large amounts involved and the mandate of Congress to distribute the $65,000,000 equitably throughout the country. In most of these cases the Government owns the land necessary for the proposed project and large rentals will be saved through its early consummation.
Since the date of the original House Report 1879 Treasury and Post Office Departments have been requested to give consideration to a number of projects in places not listed in the Report. Investigations are being made of the necessity for these projects and estimates of cost will be prepared as soon as such studies have been completed. The list of places is submitted as a separate statement to accompany the revision of House Report 1879.
Very truly yours,
H. MORGENTHAU, Jr.,
STATEMENT No. 1.-Revision of H. R. Report No. 1879, Seventy-third Congress, second session, relative to the emergency construction of public-building projects outside of the District of Columbia, showing: (a) Projects selected by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postmaster General under the $65,000,000 appropriation contained in the Emergency Appropriation Act, June 19, 1934, and (b) projects not yet authorized. (Limits of cost include administrative expenses)