erally taken a position that programs of this type aren't really necessary, considering the context of their income strategy, so to speak, as embodied in H.R. 1. That is, if H.R. 1 were to be passed that would take care of the income needs of senior citizens, and we don't need public service jobs, we don't need senior aides, et cetera. Would you care to comment on that?

Senator KENNEDY. I don't think there could be anything further from the truth. I think, first of all, and I am sure that you have heard here this morning and will hear, the senior citizens and the older Americans want to be able to participate in a meaningful way in their own communities. They want to try to pour back into their local communities the benefits of their life experience, to help meet local needs. Just as important as income to permit the elderly to live in dignity, I think it is equally important that we provide them opportunities to continue as useful and contributing members of our society. We have seen, as is mentioned here, and I am sure you have had ample testimony, that time and time again senior citizens will turn their backs on welfare because they want to work. I think there is an equal challenge to us in the Congress to create a rational income policy but also a meaningful job opportunity program for citizens.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you, Senator.

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much.

Senator EAGLETON. Our next witness will be Mr. John Gunther, executive director of the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

Mr. Gunther is a very able and articulate spokesman on behalf of American cities and we welcome him and await his presentation.

STATEMENT OF JOHN J. GUNTHER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS; ACCOMPANIED BY J. THOMAS COCHRAN, LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL AND CAROL KOCHEISEN, LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT

Mr. GUNTHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have with me today on my right Mr. Tom Cochran, legislative counsel of the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors and on my left Carol Kocheisen, legislative assistant for the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

I am John Gunther, executive director of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. I appear before this committee on behalf of the more than 15,000 cities in all 50 States which are represented by the National League of Cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Mayor Maier, president of the conference of mayors and the mayor of Milwaukee asked me to explain his nonpresence today in that the Wisconsin Legislature is just finishing up its session and there are many matters of importance to the city of Milwaukee pending and he could not leave the State. Mayor Lugar, president of the National League of Cities and mayor of Indianapolis also had to stay home since he is campaigning for reelection. They did ask me to thank you for having us today. A national unemployment rate that hovers around 6 percent over a period of months presents innumerable problems for many people, but is particularly difficult for older persons trained for jobs that have become obsolete or that are being phased out in the alteration of na

tional priorities. Despite the fact that experience generally indicates that older workers have much lower accident and absentee rates than their younger counterparts, there appears to be a decided bias against hiring the middleaged or older person in a youth-oriented society.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors has through the years supported manpower programs for the older workers in our Nation, as has the National League of Cities. Last year, the Conference spent much of its legislative effort in support of a comprehensive manpower program that included a significant section on manpower opportunities for older citizens. For 4 years, we, the mayors and the cities they represent, have supported public service employment legislation providing public jobs for the unemployed on the one hand, and municipal services for our cities on the other.

We have made progress in this area but the problem of unemployment among older and middle-aged workers is a particular problem that needs special attention.

In May of this year, the Legislative Action Committee of the United States Conference of Mayors held one of its meetings in Seattle, Wash., where the mayors focused on the unemployment problems of that area. We met with those unemployed as a result of the unemployment crisis in that city and that area are experiencing.

The mayors from all regions of the Nation talked with unemployed men and women over 50 years of age who have spent much of their productive life as engineers of the aerospace industry but now have no place to turn for employment opportunities. One man is now working as a gardener. Another indicated that he had spent approximately $1,500 of his own savings for retraining to enable him to find another job. Unfortunately, after he had spent his money and time toward another job opportunity, the employer refused to hire him because of his age.

These are examples of the older or middle-aged citizen that we have in this country at the present time with no place to go. These men and women were between 50 and 55 years of age. As we have indicated on several occasions, in testimony before Congress the need for public services, particularly in the areas of health, housing, child development, and so forth, has substantially increased. Rising unemployment among all groups and the decreasing ability of local government to provide the necessary services because of diminishing fiscal resources have compounded an already grave situation. While municipalities are not presently in a financial position to retrain or absorb the older workers, many meaningful work opportunities do exist in the public sector. Along these lines we feel that there are five essential issues that cannot be over-emphasized:

First, training money with no provision for jobs to follow the training is an exercise in futility and frustration. We feel that training is essential in public service employment for the older worker who finds himself at age 50 with a technical skill but no job or job market available.

We caution the committee to provide assurances that the training provided under these bills will be useful training, that is, training related solely to actual jobs that are available. Many times in the past we have had training programs with no jobs at the end of the line.

People go from one training program to the other and still seeking employment at the end of each. Indeed, this is why the Conference of Mayors has pushed so hard for public service employment legislation. We have the jobs in the cities and we have said before, we need less training money and more funds for operational expenses. In the instance of the older skilled employees, training or rather retraining may be necessary, but the prime importance should be placed on making jobs available.

Second, direct Federal/local funding is essential to the effective. implementation of any jobs programs. The prime sponsor must be the direct recipient of Federal manpower funds and have the authority to plan and coordinate to meet local needs.

Third, local government should be the prime sponsor of local employment programs or have the authority to designate such a local sponsor for public sector jobs. It is only at the local level that needs and priorities as well as the availability and type of local personnel can be best evaluated.

Fourth, any effective manpower program, be it for young middleaged or old, must be designed to reach high densities of unemployment in localities. A clear and guaranteed formula for allocation of funds to local units of government based on local needs must be developed.

Fifth, full Federal funding is essential. The financial crisis is such in many of our cities that it would be difficult to raise local matching funds.

Again, on behalf of the Nation's mayors and their cities, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee today and I can assure you that the mayors and the cities that they represent stand ready to assist in any way possible toward meeting the goal that we all share, full job opportunities for those unemployed citizens now handicapped due to shifts in Federal spending and age. We can ill afford to let our human resources lie dormant. The talents of many older persons must be used and we know that, with Federal funds for salaries, the cities have the job opportunities available now.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you, Mr. Gunther. Can you expand a bit further on this question of the allocation of the funds, bearing in mind the problems that we are facing under the allocation of funds pursuant to the Emergency Employment Act, that was just passed? Should we try to formalize and write into law a better method of insuring that the funds get to the areas of most desperate and urgent need?

Mr. GUNTHER. Mr. Chairman, as you know so well, mayors generally take the position that the Executive should be allowed as much flexibility in the administration of a program as possible. This has been our position with respect to how Governors operate and how the Executive Offices of the present national administration operates. However, as the Congress was developing public service employment legislation, you got very little help from the administration. First, you got opposition, then you got a veto and then when it became clear you were going to enact another law, you got very little help and guidance as to how such a program ought to be administered.

Since the bill was passed and signed by the President, we have been encouraged by the President's statement, that we are going to make this work in a hurry, we are going to start employing people right away. We have been in contact with his Office hoping that we could start this new program up by Labor Day, put the first people on the payroll by Labor Day of this year. The allocation formula announced Friday by the Secretary of Labor was a great disappointment to all of us who worked on this legislation. It is a formula that goes way beyond anything that was discussed, to our knowledge, with the Members of Congress and indeed with us.

We have volunteered to work closely with the Executive Office of the President and the Labor Department in developing the guidelines, administration, the distribution formulas. We found out about the distribution formulas from the same press release that most of the Nation found out about it and we were quite surprised to find that, for example, the State of Pennsylvania got less than half of what we thought they would get under a fair distribution formula based on the number of unemployed persons in the State of Pennsylvania as compared to the rest of the Nation.

We found that New York got about half. We found that Maryland got less than half. Therefore, we believe that you are probably going to have to enact into law some more detailed formulations than we would normally recommend because to leave it to administrators who have opposed the legislation does not seem the way to get the program into action.

Senator EAGLETON. So, drawing from that very recent and current experience with the emergency employment bill, perhaps we should consider a more structured formula than allocation on this bill if it turns out that the administration either opposes it or is indeed reluctant about it.

Mr. GUNTHER. Yes, I would say that if you can determine where the unemployed older workers are and that is what this bill is aimed at, then you ought to write a formula which requires a fair and equitable distribution of the funds available to get to those people.

I think to leave it totally open to Executive decision would be a mistake. I must say the Public Service Employment Act that we were discussing a moment ago does not really seem to us to be that wide open to determination. However, the administration took advantage of the small opening and they drove a truck through it.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you, Mr. Gunther.

Our final witness this morning is Dr. Weldon Barton, assistant director for legislative services of the National Farmers Union. I think Mr. Blue Carstenson himself was going to be here, perhaps, but he suffered a heart attack earlier this week and we extend our best wishes for a speedy recovery to Mr. Carstenson.

STATEMENT OF WELDON V. BARTON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE SERVICES, NATIONAL FARMERS UNION

Dr. BARTON. Thank you very much, Senator, and I will certainly convey that to Blue. He certainly had planned to be here and give this testimony as you had invited him to do. I know that he is really

disappointed that he could not make the meeting today but he did have a heart attack last Sunday and remains in the hospital today.

Mr. Chairman, we have a five-page statement that was put together primarily by Blue before he went to the hospital. I would like to summarize it very briefly and submit it in full for the record at this point.

Senator EAGLETON. The statement will be printed in the record in full at the end of your testimony.

Dr. BARTON. Our statement, Mr. Chairman, cites statistics showing that during the last year and a half persons 55 to 64 years of age were hit much more severely by unemployment than the general population. The statement also shows that although those persons 65 and older appeared to have suffered less unemployment, this is only because the aged tend to be classified as "retired," officially, rather than "unemployed."

No doubt the problem of poverty and unemployment among middleaged and older persons is critical, and it is getting worse rather than better. Congress has responded vigorously to the problem by providing programs for employment of middle-aged and older workers. Yet, when it comes down to placing dollars on the line, the Department of Labor continues to interpret legislation passed by the Senate and House in such a manner that few dollars or jobs go to anybody over age 25. The three bills pending before this committee S. 555, S. 1307, and S. 1580-would strengthen and expand employment and training programs for middle-aged and older workers.

The Farmers Union fully supports early enactment of legislation based upon these bills. We would also urge the committee, Mr. Chairman, to use its influence to get the administration to fund programs of employment for the aged at levels that match the seriousness of the poverty and unemployment problem that faces these people.

Mr. Chairman, rather than present any more of this statement, we have a 20-minute film on the Green Thumb program entitled, "Green Thumb in Service to America," that I am prepared to show at this point, if it is the pleasure of the committee. I would like to just conclude by showing this film.

Senator EAGLETON. Before we get into the film and we do want to see it, is Green Thumb the biggest single program within the senior aides concept?

Dr. BARTON. It is, Mr. Chairman. It does have more people employed at this point than any other of the Mainstream programs. We have a total at this time of 2,680 people in Green Thumb or Green Light, Green Thumb being the program for older men and Green Light the program for older women.

We have Green Thumb in 17 counties of the Nation now and as Senator Kennedy pointed out in his testimony earlier this morning, there is a need in virtually all of the other States for this program and in numerous additional counties if we could get the money to expand the program. Certainly the people are there and ready to work, and there would be no problem of expanding this program tremendously if we could get the funding.

Senator EAGLETON. You have 2,680 in both Green Thumb and Green Light.

70-641 0-72- 8