Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Mr. JUMP. I do not know. Mr. MacDonald will know about that, if it affects road funds.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Will you ask him to find out what he can about that before he appears on his items, so that we may have some statement on it? I think the House will be interested to know.

Mr. Jump. Mr. MacDonald will be prepared to discuss that when the item comes before the committee.

Mr. BUCHANAN. I have special reference to the amount that the Reconstruction Finance Corporation has advanced, to be taken out of the road fund in case those advances are not repaid.

Mr. JUMP. I understand. Of course, the cities do not get any money from this fund.

Mr. BUCHANAN. Yes; they do.
Mr. JUMP. Not to amount to anything.

Mr. BUCHANAN. In Texas each little town has a committee that meets and determines how much they will need. That is transmitted to the governor and the governor certifies that to the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The Reconstruction Finance Corporation sends their agent down and it is distributed to those cities and charitable organizations throughout the State.

Mr. JUMP. What I am referring to is that the cities do not get any of this Federal aid on roads.

Mr. BUCHANAN. I am talking about the amount that is advanced for charities to the different cities.

Mr. JUMP. I do not know anything about that. I have in mind that all Federal aid on roads is Federal aid to the States and not political subdivisions thereof.

ANALYSIS OF EXPENDITURES

Mr. BUCHANAN. Will you proceed with your general statement, Mr. Secretary?

Mr. DUNLAP. Mr. Chairman, I have several statements here which I believe will be of interest to the committee showing how the department spends the funds with which it is charged. I am submitting an analysis of expenditures of the Department of Agriculture during the last three fiscal years, 1931, 1932, and 1933. The figures for 1933, of course, are estimated. We have the various sums itemized; road funds, emergency relief loans, payments to States for experiment stations, and so forth; ordinary activities, and so forth. I will leave these statements for the record.

(The statements referred to are as follows:)

[blocks in formation]

Analysis of expenditures, Department of Agriculture --Continued

(On basis of checks issued, as shown in Budget Statement No. 2)

Items

Fiscal year

1931

Fiscal year

1932

Fiscal year 1933 (estimated)

[blocks in formation]

1. Roads-Continued.
(b) Emergency relief and construction acts-

Federal aid (advances) to States..

Forest roads and trails..
Public-land highways.

Total, emergency road funds. (c) Mount Vernon Highway.

Total for roads, as above..
2. Emergency relief loans..-
3. Payments to States (exclusive of road funds):

State experiment stations.-
Extensi work
Forest fire prevention, national forest receipt funds, etc...

Total, payments to States, as above.
4. Ordinary activities of department:
(a) Some of larger items clearly of general public interest,

as follows:
Weather Bureau (general).
Weather Bureau (for aviation).
Meat inspection.
Food and drug laws.
Forest service...
Biological survey.
Tuberculosis eradication.-

Total, above items..
(b) Remaining ordinary activities, including many items

of general public interest as well as items directly

for benefit of agriculture... Total, ordinary activities, as above... 5. Total, Department of Agriculture, all purposes. 6. Adjustment between checks issued and paid. 7. Cash withdrawals from Treasury..

[blocks in formation]

* Expenses of collection of loans made in previous years. • Excess of prior-year checks paid in 1932 over current checks outstanding, including approximately $12,500,000 on account of roads.

[blocks in formation]

DIVISION OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR, 1933 Mr. Chairman, there is something to which I would like especially to call the committee's attention. There has been considerable criticism of the department on account of the large total of its expenditures, running around $300,000,000 for the past three years and I would like to insert these figures to explain the real factors that enter into these large totals.

During the current fiscal year, 1933, for example the percentage of our funds that has been spent on roads is more than 76 per cent of the entire total—4.86 per cent has been expended for payments in States for agricultural experiment stations and extension and cooperative forestry activities. The amount of that is $15,279,100. Fifteen hundredths of 1 per cent has been expended for collection of relief loans, which amounted to $470,000.

Ten per cent has been expended on ordinary activities of the widest possible public interest, in amount, $31,881,341; 8.67 per cent has been expended on ordinary activities more directly related to agriculture, in amount $27,254,000. For the sake of greater clarity, I would like to insert this in the form of a statement for the record.

(The statement referred to is as follows:)

Classification of Department of Agriculture estimated expenditures, fiscal year 1933

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

For roads.
For payments to States for agricultural experiment stations, extension work, and

cooperative forestry activities
For collection of relief loans.
Ordinary activities of widest possible public interest, including the weather service,

meat inspection, food and drug laws, administration and protection of the natural

forests, Biological Survey, and tuberculosis eradication. Ordinary activities more directly related to agriculture.

[blocks in formation]

REDUCTIONS IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1933

There is one other thing I would like to call to the committee's attention. I think the public generally is of the impression that our department did not receive a 10 per cent cut, as some of the other departments received last year. It is true that it did not get the flat 10 per cent cut by the Senate, that some of the other departments did at that time, but on the ordinary activities of the department alone, we received a cut of 14.35 per cent below 1932.

Mr. BUCHANAN. That is, the McKellar amendments?

Mr. DUNLAP. Yes; including everything. But if we take all of the appropriations made for the department, the reduction for 1933 was 38.36 per cent below 1932. I would like to leave this in the form of a statement for the record. I do not believe it is generally realized that the department itself, exclusive of payments to the States, spends only about $28,000,000 a year for activities directly related to agriculture, which is very different from the $300,000,000 total charged to us, but these statements will show that to be a fact.

(The statement referred to is as follows:) Appropriations for 1933, compared with appropriations in 1932, by main group

heads

[blocks in formation]

1 Exclusive of the following road items administered by the Department of Agriculture, contained in the emergency relief and construction act which was passed July 21, 1932, subsequent to the regular agri. cultural bill: Advances to States for Federal-aid highways.

$120,000,000 National forest highways...

5,000,000 National forest protection roads and trails and other improvements.

5,000,000 Public-land highways...

2,000,000 Total.......

132,000,000 Including the $132,000,000 emergency road funds, the grand total charged to the department for 1933 was increased from $185,883,236 to $317,883,236.

DISTRIBUTION OF ESTIMATES, 1934

I believe that is all I have of a general statement, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. JUMP. At this point I would like to insert in the record the usual summaries of the Budget estimate for 1934 compared with the appropriation for 1932 and 1933.

(The statements follow:) Department of Agriculture-Statement of appropriations 1932 and 1933, and Budget

for 1934

[blocks in formation]

Department of Agriculture-Statement of appropriations 1932 and 1933, and Budget

for 1934-Continued

SUMMARY, BY GROUPS AND BUREAU UNITS

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »