(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Migrant and seasonal farmworker powerlessness. Hearings, Ninety-first Congress, first and second sessions .."

loq-a 



3io2i2"''3TTT SeT SEASONAL FARMWORKER 

POWERLESSNESS 



V r' ■r? Q 'T^ 



'. <. \ ^ O' i-Jl t 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMIHEE ON MIGRATORY LABOR 



OF THE 



COMMITTEE ON 
LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE 
UNITED STATES SENATE 

NINETY-FIKST CONGRESS 

FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS 
ON 

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? 



JULY 20, 1970 



PART 8-A 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 





MIGRANT AND SEASONAL FARMWORKER 
POWERLESSNESS 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MIGKATORY LABOR 

OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

NINETY-FIRST CONGRESS 

FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS 
ON 

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? 



JULY 20, 1970 



PART ^A 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 




U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
36-813 O WASHINGTON : 1970 



COMMITTEE OX LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE 

RALPH YARBOROUGH, Texas, Chairman 
JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West Virginia JACOB K. JAVITS, New York 

HARRISON A. WILLIAMS. Jr., New Jersey WINSTON L. PROUTY, Vermont 
CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island PETER H. DOMINICK, Colorado 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts GEORGE MURPHY, California 

GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania 

WALTER F. MONDALE, Minnesota WILLIAM B. SAXBE, Ohio 

THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri HENRY BELLMON, Oklahoma 

ALAN CRANSTON, California 
HAROLD E. HUGHES, Iowa 

Robert O. Harris, Staff Director 

John S. Forsythe, General Counsel 

Roy H. MiLLENSox, Minority Staff Director 

Eugene Mittelman, Minority Counsel 



Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 

WALTER F. MONDALE, Minnesota, Chairman 
HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, Jr., New Jersey WILLIAM B. SAXBE, Ohio 
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts GEORGE MURPHY, California 

ALAN CRANSTON, California RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania 

HAROLD E. HUGHES, Iowa HENRY BELLMON, Oklahoma 

BoREN Chertkov, Counsel 

Herbert N. Jasper, Professional Staff Member 

Edgene Mittelman, Minority Counsel 

(II) 



Format of Hearings on Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker 

powerlessness 

The Subcommittee on Migratory Labor conducted public hearings 
in Washington, D.C., during the 91st Congress on "Migrant and 
Seasonal Farmworker Powerlessness." These hearings are contained 
in the following parts : 

Subject matter Hearing dates 

Part 1 : Who are the Migrants? June 9 and 10, 1969. 

Part 2 : (The Migrant Subculture July 28, 1969. 

Part 3-A : Efforts To Organize July 15, 1969. 

Part 3-B: Efforts To Organize July 16 and 17, 1969. 

Part 4-A : Farmworker Legal Problems Aug. 7, 1969. 

Part 4-B : Farmworker Legal Problems Aug. 8, 1969. 

Part 5-A : Border Oommuter Labor Problem May 21, 1969 

Part 5-B : Border Commuter Labor Problem May 22, 1960 

Part 6-A : Pesticides and the Farmworker Aug. 1, 1969 

Part 6-B : Pesticides and the Farmworker Sept. 29, 1969 

Part 6-C : Pesticides and the Farmworker Sept. 30, 1969 

Part 7-A : Manpower and Economic Proiblems April 14, 1970 

Part 7-B : Manpower and Economic Problems April 15, 1970 

Part 8-A : Who Is Responsible? July 20, 1970 

Part 8^B : Who Is Responsible? July 21, 1970 

Part 8-C : Who Is Responsible? July 24, 1970 



(III) 



CONTENTS 



CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES 

Monday, July 20, 1970 

Page 

Wheeler, Raymond M., M.D., internist, Charlotte, N.C 4980 

Lipscomb, Harry, M.D., director of the Institute for Health Services Re- 
search, Ba^-lor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex.; and member of the 

Citizens Board of Inquiry Into Health Care Services 5067 

Casso, Ramiro, M.D., general practitioner, McAIlen, Tex 5098 

Harper, Gordon, M.D., pediatric trainee, Boston, Mass 5104 

Love, Carl R., M.D., president, Hidalgo County Medical Society, Mc Allen, 

Tex 5121 

STATEMENTS 

Casso, Ramiro, M.D., general practitioner, McAUen, Tex 5098 

Prepared statement 5 103 

Harper, Gordon, M.D., pediatric trainee, Boston, Mass 5104 

Prepared statement, with report on his visit to the Connecticut River 

VaUey - 5115 

Lipscomb, Harry, M.D., director of the Institute for Health Services Re- 
search, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex.; and member of the 

Citizens Board of Inquiry Into Health Care Services 5067 

Prepared statement, with appendix 5087 

Love, Carl R., M.D., president, Hidalgo County Medical Society, McAUen, 

Tex 5121 

Migrant legal action program, Washington, D.C., prepared statement 5327 

Senn, Dr. Milton J. E., Yale University, New Haven, Conn., prepared 

statement 5113 

Wheeler, Raymond M., M.D., internist, Charlotte, N.C 4980 

Prepared statement 5062 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 

Articles, publications, etc.: 

"Access," a prehminary position paper prepared by the migrant legal 

action program, Washington, D.C 5255 

"Apathy Still Factor in Battle of PoUo," from the Valley Morning 

Star, Weslaco, Tex., July 17, 1970 5070 

California Rural Legal Assistance (press release) 5202 

Conference report on H.R. 14705, Emplo\^ment Security Amendments 

of 1970 (excerpts from the Congressional Record, July 23, 1970) 5007 

"Deficiencies of Present Food Stamp Plan for Migrants," by Iowa 

State Department of Social Services 5154 

Employment Security Amendments of 1970, Calendar No. 755, 

Federal-State unemployment compensation program — conference 

report (excerpts from the Congressional Record, August 4, 1970) — 5025 

H.R. 14705 (excerpts from the Congressional Record, April 7, 1970)-- 4993 

"H.R. 14705 Could Be In Peril— Help!" from the Advisor, Unemploy- 
ment Benefit Advisors, Inc., Washington, D.C, May 7, 1970 5005 

Intention to oppo.se conference report on H.R. 14705, the Employment 
Security Amendments of 1970 (excerpts from the Congressional 
Record, May 20, 1970) 5002 

Mondale-Saxbe effort to reject the conference report on H.R. 14705 

and return to conference with instructions 5024 

(V) 



VI 

Articles, publications etc. — Continued 

"Nutritional Status of Preschool Mexican-American Migrant Farm Paee 

Children," by the Colorado Migrant Council, Denver, Colo 5130 

Petition to cut off agricultural subsidies to growers in violation of the 

law in California 5205 

"Unemployment Compensation for Farmworkers," (press release from 

the office of Congressman James G. O'Hara, of Michigan) 5006 

"Unemployment Still a Serious Problem," editorial from the Wash- 
ington Post, July 8, 1970 5007 

"Washington Comment," by Ken Scheibel, from the Packer, May 9, 

1970 5002 

Communications to — 

Chertkov, Boren, office of Hon. Walter F. Mondale, a U.S. Senator 
from the State of Minnesota, Senate Office Building, Washington, 
D.C., from William G. Binallock State director, Michigan Migrant 

Ministry, Inc., Lansing, Mich., August 1, 1969, with enclosures 5197 

Mondale, Hon. Walter F., a U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota, 
from: 

Lyng, Richard, Assistant Secretary, Department of Agriculture, 

"Washington, D.C., May 25, 1970,"^ with enclosure 5161 

Martinez, Ralph D. deputy director, Colorado Migrant Council, 

Denver, Colo., July 30, 1970, with enclosure 5129 

Richardson, Elliot L., Secretary, Health, Education, and Welfare, 

Washington, D.C., November 10, 1970, with enclosure 5278 

Letter to Secretaries of Agriculture, Labor, Commerce, Housing and Urban 
Development, Health, Education and Welfare, and to the Director of the 
Office of Economic Opportunity, by Senator Walter F. Mondale, chair- 
man. Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 5318 

Answers to letter 5319-5326 

Selected tables: 

Benefit cost rates and average tax rates for selected industries by 

State (selected years) 5034 

Employers added to unemployment insurance by conference version of 

H.R. 14705 5029 

Farmworkers, number of farm emploj-ees: selected years 5035 

Jobs added to unemployment insurance coverage by conference version 

of H.R. 14705— May 5, 1970 5029 

Migrant health projects 5281 

Number of persons who did any farmwork during years 1947-68 5034 



MIGRANT AND SEASONAL FARMWORKER 
POWERLESSNESS 

(Who Is Responsible?) 



MOISTDAY, JULY 20, 1970 

U.S. Senate, 
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 
or THE Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 

Washington, B.C. 

The subcommittee met at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 318, 
Old Senate Office Building, Senator Walter F. Mondale (chairman 
of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Mondale (presiding), Yarborough, and Saxbe. 

Committee staff members present : Boren Chertkov, counsel. 

Senator Mondale. The subcommittee will come to order. 

This morning the Migratory Labor Subcommittee begins the eighth 
in a series of hearings on "Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker Power- 
lessness." 

Today, we begin hearings with the conscience of a Nation awakened 
to our cause. Last week's remarkable NBC-TV documentary "Mi- 
grants — An NBC White Paper," has created an atmosphere of out- 
rage and revulsion over the desperate plight of hundreds of thousands 
of our fellow citizens who have systematically been denied the status, 
the rights, the pride, the human decency, and the reward for their 
labor which we hold to be the birthright of all Americans. 

We saw the documented evidence of the squallor, degradation, and 
racism which our Nation bestows upon the migrants. We saw the 
helplessness, fear, and frustration of a people whose only hope is 
for their children to escape the fate into which they were born. And 
we saw, most tragically, these children — underfed, poorly clothed, 
deprived and isolated — falling further behind in school and falling 
further into the hopeless trap of the migrant stream. 

A migrant camp is a microcosm of nearly every social ill, every 
injustice, and everything shameful in our society : poverty almost 
beyond belief, rampant disease and malnutrition, racism, filth and 
squalor, pitiful children drained of pride and hope, exploitation and 
powerlessness, and the inability or unwillingness of public and pri- 
vate institutions, at all levels, to erase this terrible blight on our 
country. 

This is not the first time that the shame of America has come to 
us in prime time. Ten years ago, a similarly remarkable documentary 
called "Harvest of Shame" was nationally televised; and still an- 

(4979) 



4980 

other, "Wlirtt Harvest for tlie Reaper," has been produced since 
tlien. 

Perhaps our greatest shame is how little vre have done in this decade. 
We know the problems. In this subcommittee alone, we have had 
seven series of hearinors — on the life of the migrant as described by the 
farmworker himself, the reasons for the successes and failures of 
union and community organization eiforts, the border commuter 
problem, legal problems, the effects of pesticides on the farmworker, 
the economic and manlX)^^•'er issues. 

"We must now turn to the question of why we have accomplished 
so little. 

"\Aniat are the powers, the pressures, the politics, and the special 
interests that have perpetuated this degradation? "WHio has opposed 
the investigations of these conditions, and who has endeavored to 
suppress the truth? And who has worked to oppose the legislation 
or frustrate the administration of programs which might at least 
begin to meet the problems that are now so well dociunented? 

This morning, we begin with a panel of doctors. Dr. Raymond 
Wheeler, Charlotte, X.C; Dr. Harry Lipscomb, Houston, Tex.; Dr. 
Ramiro Casso, McAllen, Tex,; and Dr. Gordon Harper, Boston, Mass., 
who comprised part of a team of distinguished doctors who dealt with 
the health problems of migrants and their families. 

We begin with Dr. Wheeler. 

STATEMENT OF RAYMOND M. WHEELER, M.D., INTERNIST, 
CHARLOTTE, N.C. 

Dr. Wheeler. Thank you. Senator Mondale. 

Before I begin, I would like to introduce to the committee my medical 
colleagues who are with me today. 

On my left is Dr. Harry Lipscomb of Houston. 

On my immediate right. Dr. Ramiro Casso, McAllen, Tex.; and Dr. 
Gordon Harper of Boston. 

I am a physician engaged in the private practice of internal medicine 
in Charlotte, N.C. 

I am a member of the American Medical Association, a Fellow of 
the American College of Physicians, and am certified as a specialist 
in internal medicine by the American Board of Internal Medicine. 

I am also president of the Southern Regional Council, an organiza- 
tion of black and wliite soutlierners, who for 25 years have sought and 
worked for equal opportunity for all citizens of the southern region. 

During the past 8 years, I have studied the health and living condi- 
tions of the poor in North Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, 
southwest Texas, Appal achia, and in the ghettos of northern cities. 

I have examined children, talked to their parents, and visited their 
homes and schools. 

I have served as a member of the Citizens' Board of Inquiry into 
Hunger in the United States, which published the reiwrt entitled 
"Hunger, U.S.A." 

I have testified before committees of both the House and Senate 
of the United States concerning the existence of hunger and malnutri- 
tion throughout this country. 



4981 

In January and again in April of this year, I traveled with other 
medical colleagues in southern Florida observing the health and living 
conditions of migrant farmworkers. In March of this year, my col- 
leagues here today and I visited Hidalgo County in southwest Texas. 
We were part of a medical team of about 25 physicians, medical stu- 
dents, and technicians. There we spent 5 days examining f amtiworkers 
and their families, talking with them and other members of the com- 
munity, and visiting homes and labor camps in which the people live. 

Beginning with our visits to Mississippi and Alabama in 1967 and 
including our trips to Florida and southwest Texas this year, the 
efforts of all the physicians involved in this work have been spon- 
sored and encouraged by the Field Foundation. 

The purpose of our studies and our reports have always been the 
same. We have sought to observe and study the life situations of 
children of the poor, in order to bring their conditions to national 
attention. Their condition is one of sickness and poverty, isolation and 
neglect, indifference and exploitation, resulting in tens of thousands 
of chiklren who exist in our country today without hope, denied their 
basic rights as human beings, and condemned to lives of pain, frus- 
trations, and despair. In our minds, there can be no question about 
this fact. 

It seems equally certain that this tragic situation is directly related 
to another. In our affluent, money-oriented society, human needs of 
children have been subordinated to political and economic interests. 

Senator Moxdale. Would you yield there. Doctor? 

I think that is a point that is often ignored. We like to say of our- 
selves that we are a child-oriented society. We hear about that all the 
time. But I have heard from many others like you who have dealt with 
the problems of the disadvantaged in American society, and they have 
all come up with the same conclusion you have — that really we show 
very little concern, if any, for the children of the poor. 

They are, of course, the most tragic victims of all. They have no 
way of fighting back. They haA^e no way of obtaining their own food, 
or their own housing, or in other wavs taking care of themselves. 
They have no way to demand a quality education. As a result, we 
mangle and destroy thousands of them, millions of them, in a very 
cruel way. 

If we were truly a child-oriented society, that would have stopped 
decades ago. 

Dr. Wheeler. I certainly asfree, Senator. 

It would not be consistent with our beliefs or our purpose to portray 
those interests as intrinsically evil, Eather, we see them as basically 
uninformed, insensitive, and uncaring about the vast and irreparable 
harm that is being done not only to children, but to the very fabric 
of a society in which these children must live and take their places as 
adult citizens. 

Wlierever we went, in the south, the southwest, Florida, or Ap- 
palachia, the impact was the same — varying only in degree or in 
gruesome detail. 

We saw countless families with large numbers of children, isolated 
from the mainstream of American culture and opportunity, possessing 
none of the protections of life and job and health which other Ameri- 
cans take for granted as rights of citizenship. 



4082 

If the farmworker is injured in tlie field or if he becomes ill from 
exix)sure to pesticides — we heard of and saw many instances of both 
situations — he does not receive workmen's compensation. If he is sick 
or cannot find work — and there are many days when work is not 
available — he does not i-eceive miemployment insurance. There is no 
realistic mininnnn wa^e to guarantee him adequate pay for his work. 

If social security payments are deducted from his wages, few 
records are kept by the crew boss on which he can later base a claim. 

He has no health or hospital insurance to provide him with even 
minimal medical care and he does not earn enough to purchase it. 

The farmer is not even prohibited from working young children in 
the fields if the parents, desperate for enough money to buy food and 
shelter, chose to take their children out of school or bring along their 
pre-school-age children to pick the vegetables. 

We saw housing and living conditions horrible and dehumanizing 
to the point of our disbelief. In Florida and in Texas, we visited 
housing projects, built with public funds, which defy description. 

We saw living quarters constructed as long cinder block or wooden 
sheds, divided into single rooms by walls which do not reach to the 
ceilings. Without heat, adequate light or ventilation, and containing 
no plumbing or refrigeration, each room — no larger than 8 by 14 
feet — is the living space of an entire family, appropriately suggesting 
slave quarters of earlier days. I doubt if the owners of fine racing 
horses or dogs along the east Florida coavSt would think of housing 
their animal property in such miserable circumstances. 

We saw many different kinds of housing and perhaps some of the 
worst from the standpoint of structural soundness — owned by those 
who lived there — did not create in me the feeling of outrage that some 
of the so-called better housing did. 

For example, in Dade County, we looked at quarters operated by 
the Homestead Housing Authority with public funds. There someone 
had sat down at a drawing Iwarcl and deliberately and callously 
designed a living unit which consisted of a single room with concrete 
block walls, divided partially by a block partition which jutted out 
in the center of the room. There was one door and one small window 
high up under the ceiling. The room was dark and damp at midday. 
There was nothing in that unit to make it habitable. 

There was not one gesture toward })roviding either comfort or basic 
human needs — no source of water, no toilet, no refrigeration, no heat, 
and the lighting was so dim that no child could have possibly been 
able to read or study. 

This was the creation of a public authority, a place in which it was 
willing for other human beingsto live. 

Senator Moxdale. How old was that housing unit? 

Dr. WiiEEi.ER. It was fairly old. As I recall, perhaps 30 years. 

Senator Mondai.e. I noted on mv visits that a lot of these so-called 
housing units were built in the niid-1930's. The Farm Security Ad- 
ministration was resjwnsible for some of that construction. They are, 
as you have described them, unbelievable places for human beings to 
live. Yet, for those 80 or 85 years they have been making money off 
that housing. They still charge very high rents. 

There is very little upkeep, and practically no effort to make them 



4983 

habitable. Not only are these units miserable, but, in addition, the 
local governments are making money on them. It is the only place 
that the migrants have to live. They are being charged very high 
prices. 

Dr. Wheeler. As I recall, one of the mothers that we talked with 
who lived in one of the places I just described told me she paid $14 
or $15 a week. 

Senator Mondale. That sounds like a standard charge. And, nothing 
goes to the tenant, under these circumstances, except very bad 
housing. 

I got the impression that the last time this Nation was concerned 
about migrants was in the middle lOSO's. I remember one farmworker 
who told that their housing was built after Eleanor Roosevelt visited. 
They built some nice housing. They would like to have another liberal 
visit and get some more housing. 

You see this all over the country : California, Texas, Florida. The 
last time there was any substantial migrant housing built, as rotten 
as it is, was probably in the middle 1930's. 

Have you noticed that ? 

Dr. Wheeler. We saw very little in the way of new housing. 

I recall in this particular Homestead, Fla., development they were 
building a few on the periphery of the camp. There was very little 
new housing in evidence at the places I visited. 

Senator Mondale. The only place I saw new housing was outside 
of Delano because the tenants struck because they were living in small 
corrugated slliacks that were built after Mrs. Roosevelt visited 30 years 
ago. A grown man could not stand up in them. You can imagine what 
that is like in the summer, two little holes in each side, what they call 
windows, I guess. 

These families were cramped in there. They were paying fantastic 
rents. They finally had a rent strike, and the county then built some 
new housing. 

Senator Yarborough. Dr. Wheeler, Senator Mondale, the chairman 
of this subcommittee, and I visited a number of Colonias in Cameron 
and Hidalgo County in the past few months. Back of that screen of 
briar and thornbush out in front is a kind of thornbush curtain that 
can be 100 yards from the highway and the traveling public on the 
major U.S. highway traveling for years never dreamed that those 
Colonias existed. 

"Wlien we went in there, we were told we were the first legislatoi^ who 
had ever been in there from either a congressional or a State legislative 
committee. 

We found tlie conditions of sanitation and ill health — not being 
doctors, we could not judge the ill health except from seeing them and 
talking to the people and having them tell us about it but we could 
see conditions of sanitation and the other things there that you are 
describing. 

I was not with Senator Mondale in Florida. But these we saw in 
my home State when we went there. We inquired about the health 
programs we enacted. We found not even a registered nurse came 
into those Colonias to look at the people. 

So, you have people listening who have seen some of these things 



4984 

with their own eyes. "We listen with great interest and a great hope of 
doing something about it. 

Dr. AVhkeler. I share that hope. 

Senator Moxdai.e. Please ])rooeed, Dr. "\^^leeler. 

Dr. AVuEKLER. I think while we are talking about housing it would be 
helpful for us to think about the effects on a child who has to live in 
one of these jx>orly ventilated, p{X)rly lighted one-room dwelling units, 
aside from the i^hysical health, the physical discomfort of the heat, 
the cold, and dami)ness. 

The absence of fresh air and the crowding greatly increases the like- 
lihood of transmission of contagious disease. This is why so many 
have tuberculosis jis well as chronic resjiiratory infections. 

How is it possible for a child to study and perform in school when 
it is impossible for him to read by the light available to him? How 
can he ])ossibly be emotionally well adjusted when he has no privacy, 
when he lives in a cage? How can he ])ossibly stay awake in school the 
following day when he has attempted to sleep in a bed with three or 
four of his brothers and sisters? 

How can this be, in a society such as ours, with the values we are 
presumed to cherish ? 

In all of the areas we visited, the nearly total lack of even minimally 
adequate medical care and health services was an early and easily docu- 
mented obsen'ation. Again, that which most Americans now agree to 
be a right of citizenship, was unavailable to most of the people whom 
we saw. 

The standard procedure of requiring cash for services and a cash 
de[)osit l)efore hospital admission, placas an impossible burden upon 
those least able to afford the high cost of being sick. Documentation of 
discrimination in medical services and denial of medical care will be 
described during the course of the hearings. 

We saw hundreds of people Avhose only hope of obtaining medical 
care was to become an emergency which could not be turned away. We 
heard countless stories of driving 50 or 100 miles to a city general 
hospital after refusal of care at a local hospital, 

Mexican-American citizens of the Ignited States told us of crossing 
the border into Mexico for dental and medical treatment which was 
less expensive and for care which was considered to be kinder, more 
humane than they could obtain in their own communities. 

We heard of diagnoses and treatment by nui"ses, endless w^aiting for 
simple procedures such as immunization of small children, and de- 
grading treatment by medical personnel. 

A few statistics substantiate our observations. The migrant has a 
life expectancy 20 years leas than the average American. His infant 
and maternal mortality is 125 per cent higher than the national av- 
erage. The death rate ifrom influenza and pneumonia is 200 percent 
higher tlian the national rate and from tuberculosis, 250-percent 
higher than tlie national rate. The accident rate among migrant farm- 
workers is HOO percent of the national rate. 

We know from these statistics alone that the migrant and seasonal 
fannworkers live shorter lives, have more illnesses and accidents, lose 
more babies, and suffer more than the rest of us. Everything that 
we saw and heard in Florida and southwest Texas bore out this 
knowledge. 



4985 

From the moment we set foot in Hidalgo County until we departed, 
our medical team was engulfed by a seemingly endless procession of 
distraught and anxious parents, bringing their elderly relatives and 
their families of six, eight, or 10 children — seeking medical treat- 
ment which tihey could not obtain in their own cominunities. 

Senator Mondale. Doctor, can you tell us, just briefly, how this med- 
ical team proceeded? Was there a public announcement that medical 
examinations would be made available and then in response to this 
the migrants and their families arrived? How were the people told of 
your availability? 

Dr. Wheeler. I think Dr. Casso might be able to answer that since 
he was there before the team arrived and is perhaps more familiar 
with the exact mechanism of how the information was disseminated 
than I. 

Dr. Casso. I am not familiar with just how people were advised that 
this was going to happen. But there will be other witnesses later on, 
perhaps Mr. Fernandez and Mr. Dunwell, wIid perhaps will be more 
knowledgeable than I about that. 

Senator Mondale. Dr. Casso, didn't you testify before the Health 
Subcommittee at McAllen ? 

Dr. Casso. I testified at the Edinburg, Tex., hearings, yes. 

Senator Mondale. Proceed. 

Dr. Wheeler. In partial answer to your question, some of the com- 
munity leaders in the Colonias knew we were coming and told their 
people about it. After we got there, the word spread very rapidly. 
There was some television coverage over the local station and the radio 
and in the newspapers. It seemed to be adequate in view of the num- 
ber of people who turned out. 

Senator Mondale. Could you make an estimate of how many people 
you saw and treated ? 

Dr. Wheeler. I believe we saw about 1,400. 

Senator Mondale. Did you give them treatment as well as examina- 
tions ? 

Dr. Wheeler. We tried to treat some of the sickest people. We had 
very little in the way of facilities for treatment and for follow-up 
care. But we were able to give some care and make prompt referrals 
of some of the sickest people we saw. 

Senator Mondale. How many doctors were on the team ? 

Dr. Wheeler. There were 15 doctors. 

Senator Mondale. Proceed. 

Dr. Wheeler. I was describing this mass of people who confronted 
us when we arrived there. I want to comment ]ust a little about these 
people. 

Most of these people live constantly at the brink of medical disaster, 
hoping that the symptoms they have or the pain they feel will prove 
transient or can somehow be survived, for they know that no help is 
available to them. Only two groups have any hope for relief: Those 
who are somewhat better off financially and those who are most criti- 
cally ill and become emergencies. 

Some of the people we saw were not seriously ill, or perhaps not 
ill at all, but none of them know, and most had never had the op- 
portunity to find out, if they were healthy or whether tomorrow might 
bring disaster. 



4986 

Our <rroup was not eqiiipi>ed to offer very much in the way of de- 
finitive treatment for the vast amount of illness we saw. Perhaps the 
most constructive and most helpful acts that we performed involved 
the opportunities to assure some, who had never seen a physician 
before, that they were, indeed, well and could continue their struggle 
to survive without the nagging fear of physical disability or death. 

For the rest, the majority of the hundreds of people we examined, 
it was a different, frustrating, and heartbreaking story. We saw peo- 
ple with most of the dreadful disorders that weaken, disable, and 
torture, particularly the poor. 

High blood pressure, diabetes, urinary tract infections, anemia, 
tuberculosis, gallbladder and intestinal disorders, eye and skin diseases 
were frequent findings among the adults. 

Almost without exception, intestinal parasites were found in the 
stool specimens examined. Most of the children had chronic skin in- 
fections. Chronically infected draining ears with resulting partial 
deafness occurred in an amazing number of the smaller children. We 
saw rickets, a disorder thought to be nearly abolished m this countiy, 
and every form of vitamin deficiency known to us that could be iden- 
tified by clinical examination was reported. 

Senator Mondale. "V^Hiat do you call that disease of the ears? 

Dr. Wheeler. Chronic otitis media. 

Senator Mondale. There seems to be an almost unvarying correla- 
tion between poverty and otitis media. We have seen this in Eskimos 
and Indian children. Apparently it is very widespread with migrant 
children. 

Dr. WiiEEi^ER. This is an easily preventable disease. Treatment with 
antibiotics can pre\'ent or cure most of the ear infections that we saw. 

Senator Moxdale. But, unattended, it is not only terribly painful 
but it can destroy the child's capacity to hear for purposes of education, 
and a normal life, can it not ? 

Dr. Wheeler. That is correct. 

Senator Moxdale. Perhaps many of these children who think they 
are subnormal for other reasons are re-ally suffering from a hearing 
defect as a result of this otitis media. Is that the answer? 

Dr. Wheeler. That is part of the answer. 

Senator Yarrorough. Among the skin disorders, Doctor, did you 
see any leprosy ? 

Dr. Wheeler. I believe we saw one case of leprosy. 

Dr. Lipscomb will give you a detailed rundown of the number of 
diseases and the ditl'erent kinds that we saw. 

Tliere was one case of leprosy. 

T doubt that any grouj) of physicians in the i>ast 80 years has seen, in 
this country, as many malnourished children assembled in one place 
as we saAv in Hidalgo County. 

There is one place 1 remember particularly — a labor camp in Wes- 
laco, a small town east of McAllen. 

As we walked lx>tween the rows of dwelling units, many small chih 
dren played aromid us, nmning about barefooteld through mud and 
})Ools of stagnant, refuse-filled water — the j>erfect culture for intesti- 
nal parasites, polio, and bacteria-causing infectious diarrhea which 
kills so manv children. 



4987 

We stopped and examined children at random and almost every 
child had some preventable physical defect. We saw tiny youngsters 
drinking rice water out of bottles because their mothers ha4d no milk 
to give them. Chronic skin infections, both fungage and bacterial, 
were practically a "normal" finding. 

Rickets is supposed to be a rather rare disease these days but we saw 
one child after another with deformed ribs and legs, thickened wrists, 
which are the classical landmarks of the disease. One youngster, stand- 
ing apathetically near a group of playing dhildren, had all the stig- 
mata of advanced protein deficiency — sparse, thin, reddish hair ; thin, 
drawn face; protuberant abdomen; and thin, wasted extremities. 

We stepped into one single-room dwelling unit w^here parents and 
six children lived. Amazingly, it was spotlessly clean in spite of the 
fact that the nearest source of water was a block away. 

On the bed lay a 3-month-old infant who weighed less than the 
average newborn. It was emaciated, restless, wailing, and occasionally 
pulling at a bottle which we soon discovered contained sour milk. 
There was no refrigerator in which to keep formula. The child had 
been ill for weeks, according to its mother, but at its last visit to the 
clinic, a day or two earlier, no medication had been prescribed. A 
very quick examination disclosed pus pouring from its right ear. We 
made arrangements for the cihild to have penicillin and indi^^dually 
packaged feedings of fornuila which the mother could not afford. I 
suspect we were too late, and I doubt if the child survived. 

What I have just attemi>ted to describe in Weslaco is documented on 
film taken by Martin Carr of NBC. When the decision was made to 
confine the documentary on the migrant to Florida, that film was not 
used and remains in the possession of NBC. It is my hope that it will 
be preserved and made available to the Nation, for it portrays condi- 
tions which cannot be adequately described by mere words. 

Senator Mondale. The NBC documentary was originally intended 
to include some of the work you were doing in Texas ; is that correct ? 

Dr. Wheeler. That is possibly why the television filming team was 
there. 

Senator Mondale. But the final documentary used only film that 
was taken in Florida ? 

Dr. Wheeler. That is right. 

Senator Mondale. So that the film they shot in Texas was not seen ? 

Dr. Wheeler. That is right. 

Senator Mondale. I think it might be a good idea for this subcom- 
mittee to ask NBC if they could make that film available to us so that 
we might look at it. I think we should. I deeply regret that it hasn't 
been made available for general public viewing, though perhaps there 
were technical and production problems, or most likely, there just 
was not the time to show all the horrors. 

Dr. Wheeler. Because of the tremendous numbers of pjeople who 
sought our help in a limited time, we interviewed and examined entire 
families as a unit. In one tiny rural settlement, with a medical student 
assisting me, I spent an entire day examining one family after another. 
It was a shattering experience. 

Their dietary histories were all the same — beans, rice, tortillas, and 
little else. The younger children, especially, were undersized, thin, 



4988 

anemic, and apathetic. The muscles of tlieir arms were the size of lead 
pencils — a sig^n of trross protein malnutrition. Many had evidence of 
multiple vitamin deficiencies and almost without exception, their skins 
were rough, dry, inelastic, with the characteristic appearance of vita- 
min A deficiency. 

I remember vividly the shock I received when one young boy was 
brought in who was well-nourished and I touched his skin — warm, soft, 
resilient — unlike any I had seen all day, and I called to the student 
with me to come and j)ut his hand on that child in order that he might 
refresh his memory of what a healthy skin feels like. 

The children we saw that day have no future in our society. Malnu- 
trition since birth has already impaired them physically, mentally, 
and emotionally. They do not have the capacity to engage in the sus- 
tained j)hysical or mental effort which is necessary to succeed in school, 
learn a trade, or assume the full responsibilities of citizenship in a 
complex society such as ours. 

In 1967, my medical colleagues and I traveled through the Missis- 
sippi Delta and rural Alabama. There, we saw hunger and poverty 
and human misery' to a degree that we had not dreamed possible in 
affluent America. 

In 1970, 21/^ years later, we have found in Florida and Texas, rich 
and fertile States, other forgotten Americans, living and working in 
near slavery, their children living and dying in conditions as dread- 
ful as any we had previously encountered. 

Senator Mondale. Would it be fair to say that, despite two and a 
half years of national debate and discussion, despite national tele- 
vision documentaries that were shown depicting this unspeakable hu- 
man tragedy, that for all practical purposes the lives of those you 
visited and saw just a few weeks ago were unimproved. And, that 
there was no improvement at all over what you had seen just two and 
a half years ago? 

Dr. Wheeler. I regret very much I have to agree with you. 

Senator Mondale. The one objection I had to the NBC documen- 
tary was the comment that so much had happened, that there was so 
much improvement in the past years. Maybe there are places where 
there have been improvements. But I have been in many migrant 
camps, and I have talked to many a farmworker. If there has been 
any improvement, you need a better set of eyes than I have, and in 
spite of the improvement which does exist there still is such unutter- 
able human degradation and poverty, that it is not worth comment- 
ing on. 

Would you agree with that ? 

Dr. Wheeler. Yes, sir; without any hesitation at all. 

Senator Yarborough. Mr. Chairman, I think that is a sad commen- 
tary on the enforcement of Federal laws. Under the previous chair- 
man of this subcommittee. Senator Harrison Williams, we enacted 
the first migrant labor health laws. The Congress appropriated mil- 
lions of dollars to see that something was done. 

In our visit down there last year, we found a doctor, a retired Army 
medical doctor, in charge, and just a few people, one registered nurse, 
for a vast area. But about all they were doing was keeping records. 
They were not giving treatment to the people or examining patients. 



4989 

They were drawing salaries, but from what we could see very little 
was being done with the money we appropriated. 

Senator Mondale. I can remember going in the slums and the 
migrant health director saying, "Gosh, it is interesting," 

I said, what do you mean "it is interesting?'' 

He said, "These people living like pigs down there." 

He had never been there before. It was his job; he was supposed to 
be in charge of their health. Yet, he had not even been there. 

Senator Yarborough. The reason the Army doctor took it is because 
they could not get a medical doctor to do it. He just sat at the county 
seat and drew a salary and had responsibility over about four counties. 

Doctor, there is one thing you said in here, in this row of one-room 
installations, putting a whole family in one room, 8 by 14 feet. You 
said it suggested slave quarters of earlier days. 

I have been around on tours and looked at some of these old slave 
quarters on plantations. Most of those I ever saw had a sejDarate cabin 
for each slave family. At least, the ones I have seen that still survive. 
The slave quarters had more space than this for the slaves. 

Have you seen that type where they had a separate cabin? 

Dr. Wheeler. Yes ; I have pictures of them. 

Senator Yarborough. They had more space than some of these mi- 
grant workers have now. 

Senator Mondale. That is the difference between Owning and rent- 
ing slaves. The owner had to take care of them ; he had an equity in 
them. 

Senator Yarborough. He had a great investment in them. 

Senator Mondale. Tliat is right. 

Dr. Wheeler. It is not likely that we saw more malnutrition or 
more human misery than we had seen in the Delta. Perhaps, in the 
time that we were there, we did not experience as much overt hostility 
expressed by the white community as Ave had sensed in Mississippi and 
Alabama. 

In the Delta, mechanization of the huge farm industries had ren- 
dered thousands of people useless to the economy, and they were left 
to die or to survive as best they could. In some instances, it seemed clear 
that there was an unspoken conspiracy to solve the problem by making 
life so intolerable that people were forced to flee the land and the State 
in which they could no longer earn a living. No longer needed and 
unable to secure help from the white community, the black Mississip- 
pian at least had the freedom to leave, if he were able, and to seek 
a better life elsewhere. 

In Florida and Texas, the farm worker remains a valuable asset 
to the owners and operators of the huge farms which produce food and 
fruit for the Nation. Without them, corn and tomatoes would rot in 
the fields, and oranges and grapefruit would shrivel on the trees. There 
is no way that these fanns can be operated without the migrant work 
force which moves about the area, harvesting the beans and squash 
this week, moving on to gather the avocadoes another week, in another 
county. Mechanization has not yet devised a way to replace them. 

Wliat is different in Florida and Texas from the rest of the rural 
South is the deliberate, cruelly contrived, and highly effective system 
which has been devised to extract the maximum work and productivity 
from other human beings for the cheapest possible price. 

36-513 O — 71— Pt. 8-A 2 



4990 

Every effort is directed toward isolrttin<2: the farmworker from 
the rest of society, maintaining him at tlie lowest level of subsistence 
which he will tolerate — then making certain that he has no means of 
escape from a system that holds him in virtual peonage. And, to that 
the grower has the full cooperation of the Federal Government, the 
State, and the local community. 

Senator Yari50ROugii. Doctor, let me say a word there. 

You know in 1966, through the Labor and Public Welfare Commit- 
tee, we brought the minimum wage law for the first time in this Na- 
tion to farmworkei'S. 

Xow, Franklin I). Roosevelt had a national mininumi wage law in 
1933 to protect the workers in the factories and in the fields. But, for 
a long period of time, people who advocated such laws were never 
able to pass the laws through the Congress to protect the workers 
in the fields. We were able to pass that law in 1966 and brought the 
minimum up to $1 the first year, $1.15, $1.30 an hour. It is a minimum, 
not a maximum. A very poor wage but a minimum wage, where be- 
fore the wages paid had been about half that. 

I noted earlier in your statement something which indicated that 
the problem was that there has been no enforcement of that law and 
failure to enforce it or failure to get the benefits of it to the worker. 
I think this committee ought to explore that, whether the law we have 
passed has been implemented. 

Here the Congress has shown some concern by passing laws to put 
money into States to educate the migrant workers and put a minimum 
wage on their labor. Over the course of the past 10 years, these laws 
have been passed. The problem is, as we go out to the "colonias," as those 
settlements are called, that the English-speaking people seldom see 
them, and many of the more affluent Mexican- Americans never see 
them. 

The problem has been to get these laws to the people to make them 
operative, but the Federal Government has in the past 10 years been 
working, and trjnng to do something. 

Senator Moxdai.k. It is my impression that minimum wage laws are 
are being widely avoided and violated. And, the employer has to be 
fairly large in the first place. 

Senator Yarborough. Seven or more workers. All the big farms have 
more than that; the farms in Hidalgo County who hire 100 at a time. 

Dr. Wheei.er. One way to go around it is by so-called piece rates 
for piecework. They pay the worker on the basis of his production. 
They pay by the pound or by the bushel or by the basketload for what 
he picks. 

Working on a piecework basis and being paid that way, it is my 
understanding that very few of these workers are able to earn what 
would amount to the full minimum wage for the number of hours 
worked. 

At this point in my report, in order that what I say next will not 
be misinter])reted, I would like to express my high regard and respect 
for the members of the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor and my 
admiration for the hard work, the c<mimitment, and the efforts of 
all of you in your attempt to better the life of the migrant. No one 
has done more. 



4991 

At the same time, I have questions which I feel must be raised or I 
will not have carried out my responsibility to you or to the people 
about whom we are both concerned. 

These questions relate to the reasons for this hearing and the many 
hearings which have preceded it on the same and related subjects. 

You are perhaps even more aware than I of the volumes of informa- 
tion and the days of testimony which are already available to you and 
to the Congress, documenting the fact of children in our midst who are 
stunted physically, dulled mentally, and warped emotionally — chil- 
dren who are deprived of all opportunity to become productive citi- 
zens — children who will grow up to become wards of society or worse — 
perhaps hostile, alienated, and destructive. 

I have here a copy of a report of the President' Commission on 
Migratory Labor, written and submitted to President Truman in 
1951. Even a cursory examination of its pages will reveal that the 
plight of the migrant has not changed significantly during the inter- 
vening 19 years. 

Wliat does it take to make us care about our children? 

The picture we saw is one of a society thriving on greed, cruelty, 
alienation, and fear — a society which either never had or has com- 
l^letely abandoned the concerns, the ethics, the ideals which make 
dignity and freedom possible. 

What has been done to convince the Congress of the United States, 
the most powerful group of men in the world, that the time has come 
to put aside its greed, its prejudice, its concern for personal power 
and prestige — and to be concerned for the kind of society in which our 
children must live together? 

You, and only you, can change all this. How is it possible to justify 
the endless words and the devious |X)litical maneuvers which have 
delayed and withheld meaningful aid to children who don't have 
enough to eat, children whose parents have no jobs and no money for 
food or medical care? 

How can the Congress and our Nation's leadership pretend to be 
related in any sane way to the world around them when they spend 
their time and the Nation's wealth building roads and guns and planes 
and elaborate government buildings while families live 10 or 12 in one 
room without water, heat, ventilation, or even a place to wash their 
hands ? 

And children die — even worse, most of them live, numbed by hunger 
and sickness, motivated only by an instinct for survival, crowded into 
the ghettos of horror which abound in our country which produce 
desperation and loss of faith in our system. Our answer seems to be 
more police, more gims, and more punitive laws whenever they protest. 

We came away from Florida and Texas with tremendous admira- 
tion for the leaders of the people we met. These men, often at great 
risk, were working to give their ]>eople hope and leadership which 
would dispel their apathy and despair. 

In many respects, these people were stronger than most of us. They 
endure what seemed to me to be the unendurable, with patience, humor, 
and understanding. Remarkable in view of the misery which surrounds 
them and the powerlessness they experience. They have not given up 
the hope that we, who can help, will someday raise our voices and 



4992 

say that there are some things in our country which are intolerable, 
that these thin^ can be changed, and must be changed. Our time is 
running out. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

[Applause.] 

Senator Mondale. Thank you. Dr. Wheeler, for a most moving and 
historic statement of the current tragedy and disgrace of the lives of 
the migrants and their families. 

You make a challenge, a challenge to us, in your conclusion that I 
can't answer. 

"We have spent days and years in this committee listening to the 
evidence of human tragedy, tragedy that sliould never occur anywhere 
in the world, let alone in the wealthiest society on eartli. We pass laws 
that provide only minimal coverage and minimal benefits, but even 
they seem to be ignored. Bills pass the committee or the Senate and 
never become law. 

For example, a year and a half ago we traveled to a Nutrition and 
Human Xeeds Committee hearing in Collier County and elsewhere. It 
was readily apparent that the only kind of food program that would 
work is one in which the Federal Government had the ultimate respon- 
sibility for finding the hungiy and feeding the poor. If we depended 
on the local power structure, you could be absolutely certain that the 
poor were not even going to l)e identified, let alone going to receive 
food assistance. 

I led the fight in the Senate to help overcome that i)roblem. We 
passed an amendment which includes that Federal responsibility in 
the so-called McGovern-Javits bill. But that bill has languished 
in the House Agriculture Committee since that time, I regret that 
the administration is not supporting us in that record. But without 
that responsibility, I don't think we are going to meet the needs of 
these human beings. It just won't happen. 

After we came back from our hearings in McAllen, Tex., I was 
so outraged that we tacked an amendment on the Migrant Health Act 
requiring the establishment of advisory boards composed of the target 
population so that the migrants and their families would have to be 
consulted in migrant health programs. 

Now, I do not know for sure, but I have been told that not a single 
such council has been established. It is just as though there is little 
difference between passing a law and sending a letter, our legislation is 
just sort of advisory these days. It is something that the administration 
will think about and do. or not do, depending on what they want to do. 

Tlie other day I led the fight for unemi)loyment compensation for 
the migrants, at least coverage for those working for the very largest 
farmers. We have passed that in the Senate. It was not in the House 
bill. It was the first thing dropped in the Conference Committee. Even 
the Washington Post, which I regard as one of the most liberal decent 
journals of our country, wrote a public editorial saying, let us not 
jeopardize our progi-am by fighting over the migrants, I^t us drop that 
thing and go on to fight another day. 

If there is anything exix'ndable, if there is any human being that 
has been relegated to the status of worthless trash in the U.S. society, 
it is the migrant. Yet, they work harder than practically any other 



4993 

working man in our society. They crawl on their bellies, they stoop, 
they climb, all over this land just trying to find enough to live on. 

I accept the challenge; I accept the criticism; but the truth of it 
is that the migrant is without a friend powerful enough to make any 
substantial difference in his life, and that lias been true for 50 years. 

(A history of the Unemployment Insurance legislation and related 
material referred to follows :) 

[Excerpts from the Congressional Record, Apr. 7, 1970] 
Employment Security Amendments of 1970, Caxendar No. 755, H.R. 14705 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, first. I sliould like to asli ttiat the distinguished Sen- 
ator from Minnesota (Mr. McCarthy) be notifietl that the bill is now before the 
Senate. I would also like to a.sk that the distinguished Senator from Connecticut 
(Mr. Ribieoff) be notified that the bill is now before the Senate, because those 
two Senators might be interested in offering amendments to the bill. Any other 
Senators might be interested in offering amendments to the bill. Any other Sena- 
tor who may have a particular interest in it should also be notified. 

Mr. President, this is a rather significant bill and I hope that if Senators care 
to offer amendments they will do so tonight, so that we may proceed to a vote 
on them and move expeditiously with this measure. 

The bill before us today, if enacted, will represent the most significant legisla- 
tion to amend the unemployment comi>ensation program since its enactment in 
1935 as part of the Social Security Act. Senators will recall that similar legisla- 
tion was approved by both House and Senate in 1966, but was not enacted into 
law because of the inability of both houses to resolve their differences in 
conference. 

The bill before us today would extend the coverage of the unemployment com- 
I)ensation program to more than 4 million additional jobs ; establish a permanent 
program of extended benefits for people who exhaust their regular State benefits 
during periods of high unemployment : improve the financing of the program ; and 
make other changes to strengthen the Federal-State unemployment compensation 
system. 

The bill is a good one — it does not go as far as some persons would like, and 
it goes further than others would like, but on the whole it represents a reasonable 
compromise supported by virtually every witness testifying before the Com- 
mittee on Finance. 

The bill was given careful and thorough consideration by the committee. Three 
days of hearings were held in March, involving 368 pages of testimony, in addi- 
tion to the extensive work done in connection with unemployment compensation 
in 1966. 

Now, Mr. President, I would like to highlight some of the major features of the 
committee bill. 

COVERAGE 

About 58 million jobs today are protected by our unemployment compensa- 
tion system. About one-half of the 16.6 million jobs not now covered are in State 
and local governments. Most of these jobs would not be affected by the commit- 
tee bill. The bill would, however, extend coverage to up to 4.4 million of the 16.6 
million jobs not covered under present law. * * * 



The committee bill, like the House bill, extends coverage to 190,000 agricultural 
processing workers. In addition, however, the committee bill extends coverage 
for the first time to employees of large farms. Under the committee amendment, 
farm employers who have eight or more employees in each of 26 different weeks 
during the year would be brought under the program and their employees would 
become eligible for unemployment compensation benefits. The committee amend- 
ment is intended to extend coverage to those large farms which most nearly 
present a stable year-round employment .situation comparable to that of busi- 
ness and industry. The provision would not affect the typical family farm or a 
farm employing more than eight workers for only a brief harvesting season. 



4994 

The committee felt it desirable to limit the newly provided coverage so that we 
may gain administrative and cost experience before considering extension of 
coverage. Thus the committee bill would exclude the employees of a crew leader 
from coverage under Federal law, even if the crew leader had eight or more 
employees in at least 26 weeks. The committee wished to limit the provision to 
those agricultural employees whose employment experience most closely resem- 
bles that of industrial employees ; coverage of migratory labor might well pre- 
sent difficult administrative problems, and it might prove costly. 

Even though the committee bill would affect only 2 percent of farm em- 
ployers in the Nation, it would extend coverage to almost one-fifth of agricultural 
employees. 



Mr. Mondale obtained the floor. 

Mr. Mansfield. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. Mondale. I yield. 

Mr. Mansfield. Mr. President, for the information of the Senate, there is going 
to be another rollcall vote very shortly. There may very well be a roUcall vote an 
final passage. I urge all Senators to stay close to the chanil)er. 

Mr. Mondale. Mr. Pre.sident, I send to the desk an amendment and ask unani- 
mous con.sent that its reading be dispensed with and that it be printed in the 
Record. 

The Presiding Officer. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

The amendment is as follows : 

"Beginning on page 4, line 24, strike out '(other than a crew leader as defined 
in section 3121 (o)'. 

"On page 5, strike out lines 15 through 18. 

"On page 5, line 19, strikeout '(d)' and insert in lieu thereof '(c)'. 

"On page 5, line 22, strike out 'amendments' and insert in lieu thereof 'amend- 
ment'. 

"On page 5, line 23, strike out 'and .sub.section (c) '." 

Mr. Mondale. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. Mondale. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Florida. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, I understand that the distinguished Senator from 
Minnesota has yielded to me to present an amendment, which I send forward 
at this time, and ask unanimous consent that his amendment be temporarily 
laid aside. 

The Presiding Officer. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, I ask particularly the attention of the Senator 
from Louisiana and the Senator from Delaware, because I have discussed this 
matter with them. 

The Presiding Officer. The amendment offered by the Senator from Florida 
will be stated. 

The bill clerk read the amendment, as follows : 

"On page 4, line 24, immediately after '(k)' insert: 'unless performed by an 
individual other than an alien admitted to the United States to perform agricul- 
tural labor pursuant to sections 214(c) and 101(a) (15) (11) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, and'." 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, the act referred to in the amendment is the act 
under which the Secretary of Labor can allow agricvdtural workers to be brought 
into the I'nited States for temporary harvesting purposes. 

The definition of "agricultural labor" in the bill is so broad as to apparently 
not exempt them, though they are aliens, and though they, at least in my State, 
would not be (jualified to receive compensation benefits. 

I understand from the Senators from Louisiana and Delaware that they agree 
there is no intent to include that type of labor within the purview of this act, 
and I have offered this amendment to make it clear that this type of labor would 
be excluded. 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. Holland. I will, but let me make one more .statement. This matter is im- 
portant in my State, because, under the Secretary of Labor's orders, we have been 
allowing the import of about 9,000 workmen from the British West Indies 
to cut sugarcane every year. Americans will not do that kind of labor, on their 



4995 

knees, in the muck, with hand machetes. It would amount to a very considerable 
amount collected by way of taxes, but without workers being qualified to collect 
compensation payments. 

I hoi>e the amendment will be accepted. 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, this is a problem that the committee did not con- 
sider. The Senator from Florida directed the matter to our attention. We have 
looked into it. In my judgment and in the judgment of the senior Senator from 
Delaware (Mr. Williams), the amendment of the Senator from Florida is 
eminently justified. For the most part, these people would not be eligible to 
receive benefits. It serves no purpose to put a tax on their employer if no benefit 
is to flow from it. 

On that basis, I would be willing to agree to the amendment, take it to con- 
ference, and see that it receives the consideration to which it is entitled. 

I regret that we did not know about this matter when we considered the bill 
in executive session, but perhaps that is one of the losses we sustained when the 
Senator's former colleague. Senator Smathers. who was one of the ranking mem- 
bers of the Cbmmittee on Finance, decided to retire from the Senatte, and there- 
after there was no Senator from Florida on that panel. 

With that knowledge, we will be willing to make the adjustment. 

Mr. Williams of Delaware. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. Holland. I yield- 
Mr. Williams of Delaware. Mr President. I concur in the remarks of the 
chairman of the committee. Had this matter been called to the attention of our 
committee, we would have accepted it. I am perfectly willing to accept the 
amendment. 

Mr. Holland. I thank my distinguished friends. I ask for a vote on the 
amendment. 

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Bellnion). The question is on agreeing to the 
amendment of the Senator from Florida. 

The amendment was agreed to. 



Employment Security Amendments of 1970 

The Senate continued with the con.sideration of the bill (H.R. 14705) to 
extend and improve the Federal-State unemployment program. 

Mr. Mondale. Mr. President, the amendment I have offered is cosponsored by 
the Senators from California (Mr. Murphy and Mr. Oranston), the Senator from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Harris), the Senator from New York (Mr. Javits), the chair- 
man of the Committee on Labor and Pulblic Welfare (Mr. Yarborough), and the 
Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy). It is designed to guarantee that 
migratory farm labor as well as other types of farm laborers will be included 
within the coverage of unemployment compensiation. 

I submitted a statement for the consideration of the Finance Committee urg- 
ing inclusion of farmworkers under unemployment compensation program. I ask 
unanimous consent that it be in.serted in the Record at this point in my remarks. 

There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in the 
record, as follows : 

"Statement of Senator Walter F. Mondale 

"Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I thank you for the opportu- 
nity to present testimony on H.R. 14705, the Employment Security Amendments 
of 1969. I urge that this bill be amended by extending coverage to farmworkers. 

"Farmworkers are now excluded from our Nation's unemployment comiJensa- 
tion scheme. They are similarly excluded, or at best only minimally included, in 
practically every major piece of social and worker benefit legislation that we 
have ever enacted into law. Congress created, and has perpetuated, a system that 
treats farmworkers as second class citizens with respect to legal protections 
mo.st Americans take for granted : 

"Sometime in the second half of 1970, a State employment security agency 
will pay a worker who has become unemployed the 50 billionth dollar in un- 
employment insurance benefits which have been paid since the unemployment 
insurance payments began in 1936. Farmworkers have not received a single 
penny of the $50 billion. 



4996 

"In 1969 alone, more than 4 million persons received over 2 billion dollars in 
unemployment insurance payments, but no farmworkers received benefits in 
li)69. 

"Workers in some 58 million jobs. 77 i^ercent of all jobs in the United States, 
are protec-tetl by an unemployment insurance program against total loss of 
wages during si)ells of unemployment. H.K. 1470.") would cover 4.5 million addi- 
tional jol)«. bringing the total coverage to 84 i>ercent of all jobs. Another 10 per- 
cent of all jobs are uncovered State and local government jobs. Every major job 
cla.ssification in private industry is covered by unemployment insurance, except 
farmwork. But, farmworkers remain excluded. 

"Regrettably, the House Bill before you peri)etuates the exclusion of 1.3 million 
jobs in agriculture. Clearly, the exclusion of certain workers from a program in 
nhich the preponderance of their fellow workers share, is inequitable, discrim- 
inatory, unjustified, and a contradiction of this Nation's commitment to justice 
and dignity. 

"There is presently no rational ba.^is for the continued exclusion of farm- 
workers. The history of administration of this universal social insurance pro- 
gram demonstrates that previously raised objections have no merit. At one time 
this admitted inequity was justified on the theory that farm employers would 
have difficulty in maintaining records and filing reix)rts. But this has evaporated 
in the face of rei>orting requirements pursuant to Social Security legislation 
and the Fair Labor Standards Act. Where coverage under that legislation exists, 
administrative burdens have not been cited as preventing adequate administra- 
tion of the law. 

"Also, some contended that exhorbitant costs made coverage impossible, and 
at best justified more studies and research. We now have the studies and re- 
search into the cost of farmworker coverage to farm employers and the State 
unemployment insurance funds. As early as ten years ago research was com- 
pleted showing costs which at the highest are not particularly greater than in 
other industries, and some of the studies indicated costs that are far less than 
those exi)erienced by many other industries. In fact it has been argued, cov- 
erage under this act may save the farmer money by increasing the stability of 
the work force and reducing the costs of recruitment and turnover. 

"The puri)Ose of unemployment compensation is to provide an orderly meth- 
od 

"The purpo.se of unemployment comix'nsation is to provide an orderly method 
of off.setting the effe<'ts of unemployment to the individual and the community. 
It enables nondeferrable living expenses to be met without having the recipient 
rely on meager savings or community Avelfare or charity ; consumer purchasing 
power is preserved. Since benefits are i>aid by State unemployment agencies, 
the unemplojnnent insurance system keeps the unemployed in touch with job 
opix>rtunities. 

"The migrant agricultural worker clearly needs the benefit of a program 
dire<-ted toward these objectives. Most often the migrant worker is unemployed 
through no fault of his own : weather, crop conditions, oversupply of labor cre- 
ated through faulty recruiting and market information difliciilties, and crop 
mechanization that creates geographical gaps in work opportunities. 

"My proposal is not a partisan effort. Members of both parties have supported 
coverage for farmworkers. President Nixon urged limited farmworker coverage 
in his Message to the Congress of July 8. 1969. Senator Cleorge Murphy, a mem- 
ber of the Migratory I>abor Sulicommittee. has recommended coverage. The rank- 
ing Republican and Democrat members of the Hou.se Ways and Means Commit- 
tee argued, in vain, for coverage in Committee sessions. Governor Ronald Reagan 
of California has appealed to the Congress to extend unemployment insurance 
coverage to full-time farnnvorkers. and Secretary of Labor Shultz spoke strongly 
for large farm employer coverage in his testimony before you earlier this month. 
I hope this progressive, bipartisan commitment to justice for farmworkers Will 
be extended to other fields. 

"Finally. Mr. Chairman, and members of this distinguished Committee, I say 
'Let's do it'. Let's not leave ourselves in the irrational position of having again 
to say to the people that work so hard to harvest our crop.s, that 'we are going 
to i)erpetuate your second cla.ss citizenship'. Let's not even put ourselves in a posi- 
tion of going only part way by extending coverage to only a few farmworkers. 

"Let's not perjjetuate the second class treatment of our fellow Americans. Our 
Nation is rich and bountiful in promise and ix>tential. No great sacrifice is in- 



4997 

volved in granting full unemployment insurance coverage to farmworkers. Let's 
do it." 



Mr. MoNDALE. The committee version of the pending bill extends unemployment 
insurance protection to farmworkers where an employer has eight or more 
workers for 26 weeks. However, the bill also exempts workers who are working 
under a crew leader by excluding crew leaders from the newly recommended 
definition of farm employers. Many migratory farm laborers work under a crew 
leader. Moreover, in my judgment, if the committee bill language is accepted, 
those workers who do not now have crew leaders will either be required to 
quickly get them, or will be assigned crew leaders. This may serve to exempt a 
substantial segment of farmworkers from the unemployment compensation cov- 
erage recommended by the committee in order that farm employers could avoid 
the tax required to fund the unemployment compensation program. 

This amendment that I now propose is a modest and conservative one. It does 
not extend the coverage for migratory labor beyond the limits otherwi.se recom- 
mended by the committee for farm labor. This bill is a modest proposal that will 
cover roughly only about 20 percent of farm labor, and only 2 percent of this 
Nation's farms, which are the larger concerns. By extending coverage to farm- 
workers, the bill is a first step to extend unemployment compensation to the 
poorest segment of the American working force ; namely, farmworkers and 
migratory workers. 

Mr. President, this amendment enjoys bipartisan support. It is supported by 
the Secretary of Labor. Its provisions have even been supported by Governor 
Reagan of California and others who, I think quite rightly, join in the basic 
a.ssumption that of all workers, the migrants are the most poorly treated in 
American life. 

Ten years ago, there was a moving documentary film called "Harvest of 
Shame." 

Mr. Murphy. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. MoNDALE. I am happy to yield to the Senator from California. 

Mr. Murphy. I joined with the Senator from Minnesota as a cosponsor of 
this amendment. I'nfortunately, in many States, migratory labor is badly treat- 
ed. I point out that that is not so in the State of California. I would also 
point out to my distinguished colleague that some of the documentary mov- 
ies which have been made leave a great deal to be desired in treatment of the 
facts and the truth of the matter. 

However, in dealing with this particular segment of labor, there is no ques- 
tion in my mind, nor in Governor Reagan's mind, that these people sihould 
be included, and I am pleased to join with my distinguished colleague from 
Minnesota in this amendment, which I think at long last will help this par- 
ticular group which are so important to the agriculture business, not only 
in California but in 28 other States in the Union. 

Under the definition and under the language of the amendment, as my 
colleague has pointed out, it will affect only about 20 percent of the some 
230,000 of the.se migratory laborers who are so important. I enthusiastically 
endorse the amendment, and urge my colleagues to heed the voice of one who 
has been studying this problem for many years — about 30 year.s — and says 
that this is a good amendment, and a step in the right direction. It extends 
aid to people who have needed it for a long time, and who I am glad to say 
receive it under the State provisions of the State of California. 

I thank my distinguished colleague. 

Mr. MoNDALE. Mr. President, I am ready to go to a vote on this amendment. 
But first, I am happy to yield to my .senior colleague from Minnesota. 

Mr. McCarthy. Mr. President, I think it is important to note that the bill 
without this amendment leaves the way open for genuine abuse, even with 
reference to those agricultural workers we are trying to cover ; simply by 
the device of appointing a crew leader, the whole thrust of the legislation, 
which would extend coverage at least in a limited way to agricultural workers 
might be entirely frustrated. 

Mr. MoNDALE. The Senator is absolutely correct. As a matter of fact, this 
legislation ai>i>ears to pro%ide a financial incentive to the farmer who might 
require crew leaders for all farmworkers who do not now have them. Under 
the committee bill, there is no additional expense connected with the compen- 



4998 

sation of employees of a crew leader. The bill, without my amendment, simply 
avoids any coverage whatsoever for employees of crew leaders, and by a ruse 
farm employers mij^lit avoid all farmworker coverage. 

Mr. McCarthy. We might even exclude some already covered, and some 
we seek to cover in this legislation. 

I think if we were to do that, by exempting those with crew leaders, It 
would set a very bad precedent that farmworkers and those who live by the 
land are somehow .>;econd-class citizens, and should not be subject to coverage 
or protection as far as the operation of the law is concerned. 
I support the amendment of my colleague from Minnesota. 
Mr. MoxDALE. I thank my senior colleague for his support. Perhaps more 
than any other Member of the Senate, he has specialized in effoi-ts to reform, 
modernize, and. make more meaningful the unemployment compensation laws 
of this country. 

The Presidixg Officer. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the 
Senator from Minnesota. 

Mr. Williams of Delaware. Mr. President, the committee bill would exclude 
the employees of a crew leader from coverage under Federal law, even if the 
crew leader had eight or more employees in at least 26 weeks. The committee 
feels that administrative and cost experience should be gained from the coverage 
of agricultural business before coverage of additional agri<:^'ultural employees 
is considered. Coverage of migratory labor might present administrative and 
cost problems which it would be preferable to avoid in this ihtial extension of 
coverage to agricultural employment. 

The committee bill already extends the coverage to 233,000 agricultural 
workers. The committee felt in the case of migratory labor that we were not sure 
just how it would work. For example, these migratory workers would be work- 
ing for a few months, say, in Florida and a few months later they may be in 
Georgia or North Carolina, and later would be working up the coast. They would 
work in six or eight States. They might pay taxes in those States, but when the 
workers were to draw benefits, from which State would they get the benefits? 
This is one reason why we felt that the committee and the administration needed 
to study the problem a little niore before we could prefect legi.slation, and for 
that reason we rejected it at this time, with the understanding that the admin- 
istration was going to study this matter further and try to come back with a 
solution as to how it actually could be applied. Frankly, the committee does not 
understand how it could be applied at the present. 
Mr. Curtis. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 
Mr. Williams of Delaware. I yield. 

Mr. Curtis. I think the people who are interested in migratory labor should 
be commended, but we are faced with some real problems here. Our unemi)loy- 
ment systems are State .systems. 

The last rollcall vote reaffirmed, as the distinguished Senator from Delaware 
has ix)inted out, that part of the services are performed in one State, then they 
go to another State and gather fruit or vegatables or perform whatever labor 
is necessarj-, and then on to the third State. Who carries the cost of unemploy- 
ment compensation? 

Many problems need to be worked out — administrative problems — and it re- 
quires careful study and should be presented to a committee so that they could 
call in some witnesses and make sure that what is proposed is the most 
practical way to do it. 

A\Tiile the amendment is well intentioned, I feel that it should not be adopted 
becau.se of the administrative problems. 

Mr. Williams of Delaware. I concur in what the Senator from Nebraska has 
.said. 

I do not argue on this amendment on its merits. A good argument could be made 
as to the merits. I do not question for a moment the sincerity of those who 
sponsor the amendment, and they certainly have a problem. Frankly, it is a 
problem to which our committe did not have a solution. We do not have it now, 
and we do not know how we can make it work. That is why I say we have to 
oi)iK>se taking this step at this time. 

Mr. l>oxG. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 
Mr. Williams of Delaware. I yield. 

Mr. I>rOXG. As the Senator knows, in this bill we make the first effort to ex- 
tend coverage to agricultural labor. We extend coverage in this bill to 2 percent 



4Q9Q 

of agricultural employers, but we reach almost one-fifth of agricultural labor. 
In doing so, we proceed with those in the agricultural business whose activities 
most closely approximate the way a business is conducted. We cover the larger 
agricultural operations, and Ave think that this coverage is feasible and ad- 
ministratively possible. We will gain a great deal of experience with that, to 
see how further we can extend coverage to what extent we should extend it to 
others. 

We say in the committee bill that where one has eight employees and they 
work for him as much as 26 weeks, those people are covered. We did not try to 
cover migratory workers. We thought it would be very difficult and complicated 
and would create all sorts of administrative difficulties. 

This amendment would create much more complexity and much more diffi- 
culty of administration. There are other ways we could broaden coverage of 
agricultural labor under this bill, beyond that which is covered under the com- 
mittee bill. For example, it would be much easier to reduce the number of em- 
ployees from eight to six, or to reduce the number of weeks from 26 to 20, and 
cover many more people. 

These people migrate from one State to another. In some cases they might be 
in a State for a number of weeks, and if you try to collect the tax in one State 
so that benefits can be paid, you would have to trace the person from State to 
State to determine ones' entitlement. The crew leaders, after all, are migrants 
themselves, moving from place to place. They are poorly qualified to keep records 
on those Avho work under their supervision. 

For these reasons, we do not think that this is where we should start with 
covering agricultural labor. In this bill we make a reasonable start. 

The House did not cover any agricultural labor. They just left them out. 
We will be doing well in conference to persuade the House to accept what the 
committee has agreed to, without trying to get the House conferees to go along 
with something that presents serious administrative problems. 

It seems to me that we have made the right start in the right area with agri- 
cultural labor, and that the committee bill would extend coverage where it is 
most feasible and can be best administered. Then, having had some experience, 
we can consider this problem later. Otherwise, we may find that while we have 
covered 30.000 migrant laborers, because of the administrative hurdles involved, 
we have put a tax on their employment without them being able to benefit. 

Mr. Williams of Delaware. That is what we were afraid of in committee. 
Nothing in the House bill dealt with agricultural labor. The committee bill ex- 
tends it to 233,000 agricultural workers. AYe were fearful that if we included mi- 
gratory labor, in a measure which we did not know how to administer, and we 
could not suggest how it could be administered — the administration was unable 
to tell us how it could be administered — we would lose the whole package. 

That is the reason why we were afraid to put this in at this time, and why we 
are afraid to accept it now. 

Mr. Long. The Senator has made a good point, and it should be kept in mind : 
Thus is virtually the same bill that died in conference 4 years ago. The Senate 
put a lot of ambitious amendments in that bill in the 89th Congress, and the 
Senate was determined in that matter, but the House simply stood fast and 
nothing happened. 

I would hope that we would take pride in sending to conference a bill that 
would extend unemployment compensation insurance coverage to up to 4.4 mil- 
lion additional workers, and not jeopardize the bill with this amendment, which 
we believe would present an enormous administrative problem in extending 
coverage to .some 40,000 workers. In my judgment, we probably could not work 
it out in conference, anyway. 

I hope we would get on with this bill and extend coverage to the 4.4 million 
people who have been denied it altogether too long, and not tie up this bill in a 
deadlock between the House and the Senate in conference. 

Mr. Williams of Delaware. I support the argument of the chairman. I hope 
that this amendment will be withdrawn, with the promise on the part of the 
chairman and myself and other members of the committee that we are sympa- 
thetic to the problem and that we would give it careful study and try to see 
if we could work out a solution. Perhaps it could be done and incorporated at a 
later date. 

As I said before, frankly, in committee we objected to this not on its merits, 
but just on the basis that we did not know how it would work. These migrant 
workers will be working in four or five States during the year, and if their em- 



5000 

ployers contribute to the unemployment fund of four or five States, which State 
is goinp to i>ay Hie unemployment compensation? And if they have different 
rates of unemployment comi)ensation in the different States, under what basis will 
it l>ei)aid? 

It is a mathematical problem which we did not know how to solve, and that 
is why we hoi^e the amendment will not be accepted at tJiis time. 

Mr. Long. I vote<l for the McCarthy amendment., but the Senate voted that 
downi by a 2-to-l margin. If we had Federal standards, perhaps the State;S would 
better be able to administer what the Senator seeks to do with this amendment 
about crew leaders and their labor. Without any type of Federal standards, 
there is a lack of uniformity which can present a virtual administrative impos- 
sibility, in the mind of this Senator. 

Mr. Allott. Mr. President, I should like to ask the Senator from Minnesota 
a couple of questions about his amendment since I have not had a previous chance 
to study it. I feel that it might be helpful to clarify the Record on one or two 
points. 

First, is the bill now before the Senate presently applicable to the Territories 
and if so. which ones? 

Mr. MoNDALE. I would ask the chairman of the Finance Committee, the Senator 
from Louisiana, to respond to that question. I would .say it is not applicable. 

Mr. Allott. I^t me say that I have just inquired privately of the Senator from 
Louisiana, chairman of the t-ommittee, and he sjiys that it is not applicable to 
any of the Territories. I am sympathetic to the concerns of the distinguished 
Senators from California and Minnesota, although I shall not support it for 
the reasons which the chairman and the ranking member of the committee have 
stated. 

Mr. President, the reason for my question about the applicability of the Terri- 
tories is because of the alien labor situation in the Virgin Lslands. There are 
approximately 15,000 noncitizen workers employed in the Virgin Island.s. Those 
of us on the Interior and Insular AflSairs Committee have tried to find .some 
remedies to this situation. The main support for services now in the Virgin 
Lslands, however, conies out mostly from the British Virgin Islands and other 
British islands around there, and from some of the French islands. 

The Senator can .see that I would tie very much concerned about the amend- 
ment if it did apply to those aliens and noncitizens where employers would be 
paying the employment tax for those noncitizens. 

Since I have been as.sured that this does not apply to the Virgin Islands, nor 
to the other Territories in which the situation prevails, the problem does not 
apply. However, I wanted to be sure, in ca.se the amendment should pass, that it 
did not apply to our Territories or to the aliens who work in them. 

Mr. Ix>NG. I might say to the Senator that I believe the amendment offered by 
the distinguished .senior Senator from Florida and accepted by the Senate just 
before the Senator from Colorado entertnl the Chamber should completely clarify 
the matter. It excludes this sort of alien labor from the coverage provided by the 
committee bill. 

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Gravel). The question is on agreeing to the 
amendment of the Senator from Minnesota. 

On this question, the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will 
call the roll. 

The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. 

Mr. Kennedy. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Anderson), 
the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Burdick), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. 
Hughes), the Senator from Washington (Mr. Magnuson), the Senator from 
Comie^-ticut (Mr. Ribicoff). the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Russell), the Sena- 
tor from New .lersey (Mr. Williams), the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Young), 
the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Bayh). the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. 
Harris), the Senator from Missis.sippi (Mr. Stennis), and the Senator from 
Maryland (Mr. Tydings) are neces.sarily ab.sent. 

I further announce that the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Gore), the Senator 
from Rhode Island (Mr. Pell) and the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Talmadge) 
are absent on oflScial business. 

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Oklahoma 
(Mr. Harris) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Ribicoff) would vote 
"yea." 
Mr. Griffin. I announce that the Senator from Utah (Mr. Bennett) is absent 



5001 



on official business as observer at the meeting of the Asian Development Bank 
in Korea. '| 

The Senators from New York (Mr. Goodell and Mr. Javits). the Senator from 
Idaho (Mr. Jordan) and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Percy) are necessarily 
absent. 

The Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Mundt) is absent because of illness. 

The Senator from Ohio (Mr. Saxbe) is detained on official business. 

If present and voting, the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Mundt) would 
vote "nay." 

On this vote, the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Percy) is paired with the Senator 
from Utah (Mr. Bennett). If present and voting, the Senator from Illinois would 
vote "yea" and the Senator from Utah would vote "nay." 

On this vote, the Senator from New York (Mr. Javits) is paired with the 
Senator from Idaho ( Mr. Jordan ) . If present and voting, the Senator from New 
York w^ould vote "yea" and the Senator from Idaho would vote "nay." 

On this vote, the Senator from New York (Mr. Goodell) is paired with the 
Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Mundt). If present and voting, the Senator 
from New York would vote "yea" and the Senator from South Dakota would vote 
"nay." 

The result was announced — yeas 42, nays 36, as follows : 





[No. 120 Leg.] 






YEAS— 42 




Aiken 


Hart 


Montoya 


Baker 


Hartke 


Moss 


Brooke 


Hatfield 


Murphy 


Byrd, W. Va. 


Hollings 


Muskie 


Case 


Inouye 


Nelson 


Church 


Jackson 


Pastore 


Cook 


Kennedy 


Pearson 


Cooper 


Mansfield 


Prouty 


Cranston 


McCarthy 


Proxmire 


Dodd 


McGee 


Randolph 


Dole 


McGovern 


Schweiker 


Eagleton 


Mclntvre 


Stevens 


Gravel 


Metcalf 


Symington 


Griffin 


Mondale 

NAYS— 36 


Yarborough 


Allen 


Ervin 


McClellan 


Allott 


Fannin 


Miller 


Bellmon 


Fong 


Packwood 


Bible 


Fulbright 


Scott 


Boggs 


Goldwater 


Smith, Maine 


Byrd, Va. 


Gurney 


Smith, 111. 


Cannon 


Hansen 


Sparkman 


Cotton 


Holland 


Spong 


Curtis 


Hruska 


Thurmond 


Dominick 


Jordan, N.C. 


Tower 


Eastland 


Long 


Williams, Del. 


Ellender 


Mathias 

NOT VOTING— 22 


Young, N. Dak 


Anderson 


Javits 


Saxbe 


Bayh 


Jordan. Idaho 


Stennis 


Bennett 


Magnuson 


Talmadge 


Burdick 


Mundt 


Tydings 


Goodell 


Pell 


Williams, N.J. 


Gore 


Percy 


Young, Ohio 


Harris 


Ribicoff 




Hughes 


Russell 





So Mr. Mondale's amendment was agreed to. 



5002 

[From the Packer, May 9, 1970] 

Washington Comment 

(By Ken Scheibel) 

Once in a blue moon one man single-handedly stops legislation dead in its 
tracks in Congress. 

That was the case last week with unemployment insurance for agricultural 
workers, which Congress was on the verge of approving. 

The bill had been turned down by the House but was approved by the Senate. 
It was a waiting further action in a Senate-House conference committee. 

But that was before Richard V. Thornton, executive vice president of the 
National Council of Agricultural Employers, got his message to lawmakers. 

XCAE opposed the legislation but had agreed to go along if Congress wanted 
things that way. But Thornton ix)inted out that more iieople ought to do more 
thinking about the issue. 

A few hours before the group of five senators and five representatives were to 
meet to stamp a final okay on the measure, Thornton went to work in a flurry of 
activity. 

He had learned that the Department of Labor was financing a research pro- 
gram to be conducted this summer by 12 land grant colleges in the Northeast to 
determine the feasibility of unemployment insurance for agricultural worker.s. 

"It made no sense for the Department of Labor to request this bill before they 
completed their study this summer," Thornton said. The lawmakers got the 
point — and knocked the provision out of the bill. 

So, for the time being. Congress ha.s rejected the inclusion of agricultural work- 
ers under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act. 

But had Thornton not been on his toes, produce growers today would be brac- 
ing for a new^ onslaught of federal rules and regulations — which would be costly 
to administer. 

For all of his furious activity on behalf of agricultural employers, Thornton's 
approach belies his intense pace. He is friendly, softsiK)ken, and resijectful of 
all points of view. He obviou.sly communicates. 

Like President Nixon and .scads of administration officials, Thornton hails from 
California. There, he was nianage-r of the California-Arizona Farm Labor Assn. 
at Fresno. He has been on the Wa.shington scene for a year and a half. 

He was asked how he achieved his big victory for his organization — especially 
at a time when many other farm groups are flopping aimlessly around getting 
nowhere. 

Thornton makes no claim to great deeds. 

"I wrote to the Senators and Congre.'ssmen involved," he said. "Then, I deliv- 
ered the letters personally. I had to wait around for some of them and I sure 
read a lot of magazines in the waiting r(K>ms." 

What's the secret of success? ^ 

"Shoe leather, personal contact, and explaining the iwsition of farmers, he 
said. "Congressmen are willing to listen and are interested in what you have to 

say " 

Not exactly. Could be in the way you say it— and if you have something worth- 
while to say, as Thornton did. 

[Excerpt from the ConRressional Record, Wednesday, May 20, 19701 

Intention To Oppose Conference Report on H.R. 14705, the Employment 
Security Amendments of 1970 

Mr Harris. Mr. President, the distinguished senior Senator from New York 
(Mr Javits), the distinguished junior Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Mondale) 
and I have previou.slv notifie<l the Senate of our intentions to oppo.se the confer- 
ence report on H.R. 14705, the Employment Security Amendments of 1970. 

lOur opposition to H.R. 14705 is not founded on a disagreement with the basic 
provisions that are contained in the bill, but because of the fact that the action 
of the Senate extending coverage of unemployment comiiensation to farm em- 
plovers who have eight or more employees in each of 26 different weeks during 
the year and to agricultural crew leaders and their employees, was reversed in 
conference. 



5003 

A question and answer explanation of unemployment insurance coverage of 
farm employees provided for in H.R. 14705, as passed by the Senate, has been 
prepared by the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. Before the Senate considers 
the conference report, I think the explanation will be helpful to Senators, and 
I ask unanimous consent that the explanation be printed at this point in the 
Record. 

(There being no objection, the explanation was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows : 

A Question and Answer Explanation of Unemployment Insurance Cov- 
erage OF Farm Employees Provided in H.R. 14705, as Passed by the 
Senate 

background 

President Nixon, in his July 8, 1969 Message to the Congress on the Unem- 
ployment Insurance Program, recommended that the Federal Unemployment Tax 
Act be amended to provide unemployment insurance coverage to agricultural 
workers who are employed by an agricultural employer who during the calendar 
year or preceding calendar year bad 4 or more agricultural workers in his em- 
ploy during each of at least 20 weeks. 

H.R. 14705, the unemployment insurance bill passed by the House of Repre- 
sentatives on November 13, 1969, did not extend coverage to any farm workers. 

The Senate added limited farm coverage to H.R. 14705 on April 7, 1970. The 
Senate provision (Section 103(b)) provides that farm employers who employ 
eight or more workers in any 26 weeks of the current or preceding calendar 
year are covered by the Federal Unemployment Tax Act. However, nonimmi- 
grant alien workers admitted temporarily for temporary agricultural work, who 
are employed by such employers, would not be covered by imemployment 
insur^ance. 

Question. — ^How many farm employers would be brought under the Federal 
Unemployment Tax Act? 

Ansioer. — 23,000 or about 2 percent of all farm employers. 

Question. — How many farm jobs would be brought under unemployment in- 
surance protection? 

Answer. — 250,000 or about 22 ijercent of all farm jobs. Another 25,000 farm 
jobs would also be covered, but they are already covered under State laws. 

Question. — How big are the farms that would be covered in terms of jobs? 

Answer. — Clearly the great preponderance of them will be large commercial 
farming operations or agri-businesses, most of which have annual sales of farm 
products of over $100,000. There were 20,000 farming operations that had annual 
sales of that magnitude in 1964. 

Question. — How big are the farms that would be covered in terms of payrolls? 

Answer. — A precise answer is not possible. However, in 1964, the 45,000 
largest farm operators had average payrolls of $33,000. They constituted only 
3 percent of all farm operators, but they paid 53 percent of total farm wages. 
Clearly, the preponderance of the farm employers who would be covered by 
the Federal Unemployment Tax Act would be in this group of farm operators. 

Question. — Would farm crew leaders be included in this coverage? 

Ansirer. — Yes, a crew leader who was, under common law rules, the employer 
of at least 8 farm workers in 26 weeks would be a covered employer. By a roll 
call vote, the Senate deleted a Finance Committee recommendation to exclude 
crew leaders as defined under the Social Security law. 

Question. — How many crew leaders would be covered? 

Answer. — It is estimated that there are about 1,000 crew leaders who have 8 or 
more employees for 26 weeks. This is probably less than one-tenth of the crew 
leaders in the United States. 

Question. — ^What information do we have about these crew leaders? 

Ansiver. — All of the 1,000 who would be covered are required to pay Social 
Security taxes for their workers. In fact, about 2,500 crew leaders report covered 
wages for Social Security purposes each year. In other words, UI coveage 
would apply to those crew leaders who are apt to be the most businesslike in 
their operations. Furthermore, virtually all of the 1,000 come under t!he require- 
ments of the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act, and hence, most now 
register annually with the U.S. Department of Labor. This registration involves 
furnishing a permanent address, evidence of adequate liability insurance, etc. 
Most important with re.siiect to UI coverage, the Registration Act requires 



5004 

crew leaders who pjiy migrant workers engaged in interstate agricultural employ- 
ment, to keep records which show for each worker total earnings in each i>ay- 
roU iK»riod, all withhohlings from wages, and net earnings. The crew leader 
must also provide to each worker a statement of all sums paid to him (including 
sums received on behalf of the worker) on account of the labor of the migrant 
worker. A dire<-tory of all registered farm labor contractors is compiled quarterly 
by each regional office of the Mani>ower Admini.stration of the U.S. Department 
of Lal)or. 

Question. — If a crew leader employs his workers in three different States 
during a year, where does he pay his unemployment insurance taxes V 

Answer. — Ati interstate crew leader has the same two reix)rting iK)ssSbilities 
as pre.sently covered interstate employers such as con.struction, sales crews, and 
traveling circuses and carnivals. In the absenw of .si>ecial arrangements, the 
crew leader would report and pay taxes to each State in which he operated, 
based on the wages paid for services in that State. 

However, to provide continuity of coverage for individuals working successively 
in different States for the same employer, 46 States have adopted legislation 
which enables them to enter into reciprocal arrangements with other States, 
under which such employment in different States is covered in a single State 
if the employer so chooses and if the States involved agree. Fnder such reciprocal 
coverage arrangements. States and employers willing, the crew leader would 
report all of the wages of his employees to his home State, regardless of the 
fact that they performed much of the work in other States. 

Question. — Wouldn't there be serious administrative difficulties if crew leaders 
paid taxes in more than one State or even if they paid taxes in their home State 
for employment iierformed in other States? 

Answer. — There has been very extensive experience with coverage of em- 
ployers whose employees work in different States during the year. This is a 
frequent situation in construction, entertainment, sales, and other industries. 
Circus workers, for example, work in many more States during a year than do 
most employees of crew leaders. Since coverage of the 1,000 crew leaders would 
not be effective until 1972, there will be ample time to prepare for covering them, 
including informing them of their responsibilities. Also, the coverage of just 
1,000 crew leaders will give a basis for research into the feasibility of covering 
other crew leaders. 

Questifm. — What new administrative arrangements would have to be developed 
in order to pay interstate claims for benefits filed by migrant workers? 

Answer. — No new arrangements would need to be developed. Workers with 
wages in more than one State present no new problems for the unemployment 
insurance program and the Federal-State employment security system. The 
United States labor force has a high degree of mobility. Millions of workers 
move from one State to another every year. 

In 1960, a year of low unemployment, 584.172 initial interstate claims were 
paid. Approximately 30,000 involved combining wages that were earned in more 
than one State. 

Existing voluntary arrangements provide for interstate benefits to workers 
in any of 3 different .'situations. Concern over the rights of mobile workers, aside 
from farm workers, was great enough to lead to provisions in both House and 
Senate versions of H.R. 14705 which require interstate arrangements to be 
universal and mandatory. 

The Interstate Benefit Payment Plan, operative since 1938 and applicable 
in every State, i)ermits a worker who qualifies for benefits in any one State to 
file his claim again.st that State from any other State. The Basic Wage Com- 
bining Plan, operative .since 1945 and now participated in by all but 2 States, 
permits a worker who has had covered employment in several States but does 
not qualify in any to have his ba.se i)eriod wages in all participating States com- 
bined as if they had all been paid in tlie State in which he files his claim. The 
Expanded Interstate Plan for Combining Wages, which began in 1956 and in 
which all but 5 States now participate, applies to a worker who qualifies in 
one State for less than maximum benefits, and who has base period wages in 
another i«rticipating State or States. Such a worker can have his benefits in 
the State where he qualifies increa.sed by combining with those wages any base 
period wages in other jjarticipating States in which he does not qualify. 

Interstate migratorj' farm workers, whether they have been employed by crew 
leaders or farm operators, will be able to file for benefits under these arrangements. 

Question. — In simple terms, how is an interstate claim which involves com- 



5005 

bining wages earned in more than one State processed? (Such a worker would 
have been employed in more than one State during the base period.) 

Answer. — The claimant goes to the State employment security agency oflSce 
where he is residing. The claims taker interviews him to learn the States where 
he worked during a base period and to det:ermine which State the claim will be 
filed against. 

If the claimant qualifies for benefits in another State (i.e., he earned enough or 
worked long enough during that State's base period to qualify), the claim is 
sent to that State. That State then contacts the other States where he worked to 
learn how much he earned in covered employment while working in them. That 
State then pays the claimant a benefit based on his total wages and bills the other 
States for any charges against their funds. 

If the claimant does not qualify for benefits in any single State, the State 
where he makes his claim contacts the other States where he worked during its 
base period, combines the wages, pays a benefit based on the total wages, and 
bills the other States for any charges against their funds. 

This process was followed in $30,000 claims in 1969. As noted earlier, H.R. 
14705 provides for a greatly improved system of processing and paying inter- 
state claims that involve wage combining. 

Question. — What is the effect of the exclusion from imemployment insurance 
coverage of alien agricultural workers who are admitted to the United States 
on nonimmigrant visas pursuant to Sections 214(c) and 101(a) (15) (H) (ii) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act? 

Answer. — A temporary nonimmigrant alien worker is admitted to the United 
States to do work of a temporary nature. As soon as his employment is termi- 
nated, he must leave the United States. A claimant must be in the United States 
or Canada to receive benefits. Hence, with the exception of Canadians, these 
workers are not eligible to receive benefits anyway. Canada is a participant in 
the Interstate Benefit Payment Plan, and all but four States do pay claims to 
Canadian workers on a reciprocal basis. (H.R. 14705 will require all States to do 
so.) Canadian agricultural workers now enter the United States for apple and 
potato harvesting. Both seasons are short (6-8 weeks), and it is doubtful that 
more than a few of the workers would be employed by farm employers which 
have 8 workers for 26 weeks. However, since Canadian workers are eligible for 
benefits on a reciprocal basis, and H.R. 14705 strengthens that eligibility, it may 
be desirable to exempt Canada from the nonimmigrant alien worker exemption, 
for purposes of consistency. 

Question. — Will all workers who work for covered farm employers be eligible 
for UI benefits ; that is. will persons who engage in farm work for a short time 
such as students draw benefits? 

Answer. — The fact that a worker has been employed by a farm employer who 
is covered by UI does not mean that he is eligible for benefits. He must still meet 
the State qualifying requirements which are generally pegged to number of weeks 
worked, total wages received, or a combination of these. Furthermore, the claim- 
and must meet all State eligibility requirements each week to reeeiive benefits, 
including being available for. and actively .seeking work. In determining whether 
any claimant is eligible for benefits for a particular week, the agency looks not 
only at the individual's statement that he is available for work, but at his actions 
to determine whether he is acting as a reasonable individual who wanted work 
would act. 

Eligibility for benefits would be no different for persons who worked on farms 
than for persons who worked in other industries. For example, hundreds of thou- 
sands of students work in every segment of the U.S. economy during the summer, 
but with rare exceptions they are ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits 
when they return to school. Usually they do not work long enough to qualify. Even 
those who do work enough in the summer to meet the monetary qualifying re- 
quirement are not ordinarily considered available for work when they return to 
school. 



[Prom the Advisor, Unemployment Benefit Advisors, Inc., Washington, D.C., May 7, 1970] 

H.R. 14705 Could Be in Peril— Help ! 

Yesterday we learned that Senators Javits, Mondale and Harris were circulat- 
ing a letter among their colleagues urging them to reject the Senate Conferees' 
Report on H.R. 14705. They object to the Report apparently because the bill 

36-513 O— 71— Pt. 8-A 3 



5006 

adopted by the House-Senate Conference Committee, does not contain agricul- 
tural coverage. They are asking the Senators to vote to instruct the Senate Con- 
ferees to insist upon provision for covering farm lalH)r. 

Such a move, if successful, could well sound the death knell for H.R. 14705. 
If it is sent back, we foresee the possibility of a rei>eat of ISMiG when U.C. legis- 
lation died in Conference for lack of agreement. H.R. lilOo is a reasonable bill 
and we urged every Representative and Senator to support it as rei>orted from 
Conference in Advi-sor '70 U.C.-9. We hoi>e you will now join us in doing the 
same. Antf day the Conference Reiwrt could be considereil by the Senate. Every 
member of this l>ody should hetir from employers by phone or wire urging theon 
to vote for the Report as is. Will you please help today f 

J. EJldred Hill., Jr., 

Excoutive Director. 

Harold V. Kelly, 

Executive Assistant. 

[Press release from the office of Congressman O'Hara, Michigan] 
Unemployment Compensation for Farm Workehis 

Last year President Nixon sent a message to Congress which propo.sed that an 
additional 4.8 million workers be covered by unemployment insurance, including 
400,000 workers on large farms employing four or more workers in each of 20 
iceeks. 

Because the unemployment compensation bill was taken up by the House 
under a closed rule and because the Committee bill did not contain a provision 
covering farm workers, the House did not have an opportunity to consider the 
specific question of agricultural coverage. 

An amendment by Senator Mondale added to present coverage employers of 
farm workers who employ eight or more in each of at least 26 weeks. I'nder this 
amendment, an additional 270,00 workers. 22 percent of all farm workers, would 
have been covered by unemployment insurance, but less than 2 i)ercent of farm 
employers would have been covered. Coverage under the Mondale amendment xoas 
substantially less than that asked hy the President. 

Employers who employ eight or more in each of at least 26 weeks are cer- 
tainly neither .small nor family ojierated farms. All other employers in the pri- 
vate .sector are required by the bill to in.sure their employees if they employ one 
or more in at least 20 weeks. 

A motion to recommit the conference report on H.R. 14705 with instructions to 
accept the Senate amendment will be made when it is brought up. 

The opposition to e.xtending coverage is usually stated in terms of the high 
cost of even limited farm coverage. Some testimony before the Ways and Means 
Committee had cited the exjierience of North Dakota, which had extended volun- 
tary coverage to some farm employers, and concluded that "If unemployment in- 
surance were extended to nonseasonal farmworkers, costs could run from 10 to 15 
percent of taxable payroll.s." 

However, as Representative B. F. Sisk told the Senate Finance Committee, the 
North Dakota experience is almost totally unrelated to the propo.sal before us 
now. Of the 121 farm employers in North Dakota who had elected coverage, only 
1 would have been covered under the AdminLstrataon proposal, and none would 
be covered under the standards set by the Senate amendment. 

There are other jurisdictions with \iarying degrees of farm worker coverage, 
and their differing standards make direct comparisons a little difficult. But they 
can suggest the level of cost In 1968, 35 employers in Hawaii with nearly 10,000 
employees, had a co.st rate (benefits as a percentage of taxable payroll) of only 
1.1%. In lf)67-68, Canada's co.st rate was 4.5%. 

A 1965-66 study in California estimated a cost rate for extensive coverage of 
9.5%. But the 765 California employers who elected coverage for their 17,000 
employees in 1968 had a cost exi)erience of 4.5%. 

However, to paraphase former Secretary of Labor Schultz, even if farm cover- 
age were to mount to 9.5% or 10%, we could still provide these employees cover- 
age at rates comparable to the costs in other industries where unemployment in- 
surance coverage has l>een a long-standing tradition. For example, according 
to Secretary Schultz, the average co.st rate for ten California industries closely 
related to farming was 10.8% in 1967. In that same year, the cost rates for con- 



5007 

tract construction as a whole was 8.3%, while general building and highway con- 
struction both had cost rates as high as 10%. 

In summary, then, the actual cost experiences with coverage of the kind the 
Senate amendment proposes is not as high as the oft-quoted North Dakota ex- 
perience would suggest ; and in any event even these cost rates are not out of line 
with other industries where coverage is taken for granted. 



[Editorial from Washington Post, July 8, 1970] 
Unemployment : Still a Serious Problem 

If the decline in the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate from 5 per cent 
in May to 4.7 per cent in June should mark the beginning of a new trend, it would 
astonish the chart-watchers. Many economists have assumed that unemployment 
will reach ^Vo per cent on the upward curve that has been in evidence in recent 
months before a turn for the better can be expected. Others who take a darker 
view of the general economic climate place the figure at 6 per cent or more. 
However powerful the hope that these forecasts will prove inaccurate, there is 
very little to cheer about in the I^abor Department's June report. 

One reason for the statistical decline was a reduction in the number of un- 
employed women and teen-agers. But since the labor force showed a shrinkage 
from 85 million in May to 84.1 milUon in June, the analysts assume that many 
women and youths have taken themselves out of the category of job-seekers 
because the outlook was so bleak. When unusual factors of this kind impinge 
upon the samples taken by the Labor Department, the adjusted seasonal rate for 
any given month may convey a quite inaccurate impression. 

Certainly there is nothing in the report which relieves the urgency of enacting 
legislation to extend job-training programs and improve unemployment com- 
pensation. The continued stalling of Congress on the unemployment compensa- 
tion bill is esi^ecially curious becau.se the House-Senate conference reached 
agreement two months ago. The bill is important because it would authorize 
additional benefits for the unemployed when joblessness has remained at a 
national level of 4.5 per cent for three consecutive months. It would also extend 
benefits to 4.8 million additional employees and to a possible 436,000 more state 
and local employees, if .state and local governments should give their approval. 

It is said that there is some dissatisfaction in the Senate because the confer- 
ence ctommittee eliminated two amendments, although one was a rider having 
no direct bearing on unemployment compensation. The other is an amendment 
bringing workers on large farms under the system. The bill should not be allowed 
to fail for want of the.se amendments. Incidentally, the high unemployment in this 
period of economic recession also enhances the need for enactment of the bill 
for protection of workers' rights under private pension and welfare plans, which 
has made very little progress in either house. 



[Excerpts from the Congressional Record, July 23, 1970] 
Conference Report on H.R. 14705, Employment Security Amendments of 1970 

The Speaker. The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Mills) is recognized. 

Mr. Mills. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 minutes. 

Mr. Speaker, there were a number of ix)ints of difference between the House 
and the Senate versions of H.R. 14705. However, most of the differences were 
largely technical. Many of them were necessary in order to take care of problems 
arising merely from the passage of time since the House acted on the bill last 
year. 

There were, however, several matters in conference which I believe deserve 
some explanation. 

Til first two of these relate to the broadening of the coverage under the un- 
employment compensation program, that is concerning the coverage of small 
firms and farmworkers under the unemployment compensation program. 

The last two concern matters unrelated to the bill. 

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the coverage of .small firms, the Senate deleted 
the provision of the House bill which amended the definition of the term 



5008 

"employer." Under present law an employer is defined as a person or firm that 
employs four or more workers in 20 weeks in any calendar year. The provision 
of the House bill changed the definition (o include i)ersons or firms that employ 
one or more workers during the 20 weeks in the calendar year, or pay wages of 
$800 or mon> in a calendar quarter. The S<'nate deleted this provLsion from the 
bill, retaining the present test of four or more employees in 20 weeks. 

Tlie House provision was adoptetl by the conference report, with an amend- 
ment increasing the alternate tax from $S00 to ,$l,r)00 a year. So in this instance 
the House prevailed on the basis very largely of the language of the House bill. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, with respect to farmworkers who are presently excluded 
from mandatory coverage under the Federal law, the Senate adopted an amend- 
ment extending coverage to persons, other than certain aliens, who work for 
for employers who employ eight or more farmworkers in 26 weeks in a calendar 
year. The Senate receded on this amendment. 

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. O'Hara) intends to offer a motion at the proper time to .send the conference 
report back to the conference committee with instructions to include in the bill 
the language of the Senate amendment relating to the coverage of farmworkers. 

Let me say at this point that the House members of your conference committee 
took a .strong iK>sition on this issue in view of the fact that there was no provision 
covering agricultural labor in the version of the bill as it passed the House and 
beoau.se of the exi)erience which the House members in the conference committee 
had gained in working upon this issue during executive sessions of the Committee 
on Ways and Means. The Committee on Ways and Means si)ent many, many 
hours attempting to agree uix)n a provision extending employment coverage to 
farmworkers. Because of the many problems the committee encountered it was 
unsuccessful in its attempt to adopt a workable provision. 

Mr. Sijeaker. the jx'culiar nature of the agricultural labor force, which is made 
up of many migrant and sporadic workers, is the principal cause of most of the 
difficulties that the committee encovuitered. Serious objections relating to costs 
and administration presented themselves due to the makeup of the farm labor 
force. 

Recognizing the many problems that have to be dealt with in order to extend 
unemployment compensation coverage to farmworkers, the conferees modified 
another .section of the bill to provide that in conducting the research program 
authorized under the legislation, first attention — now, bear this in mind — first 
attention be given to coverage of agricultural labor under the unemployment 
compensation program. 

Mr. Speaker, I believe — and I am refering to this requirement for a study — 
that this is the most prudent course of action that could be taken on this issue 
at the present time. Although the issue of coverage of farm employment under 
the unemployment comiiensation system has been discussed for many years, the 
problems relating to it have never been adequately dealt with. Even the limited 
data we have obtained, based on the exi>eriences gained in those few States that 
have covered agricultural workers under their programs, has not been analyzed 
as I think it should be. I therefore feel that we should have the l)enefit of a 
concentrated study of the is.sue before we take legislative action to re<iuire the 
States to cover farm workers. 

I am .sure that we will learn a great deal from such a study, and that on tJie 
ba.sis of the knowledge we gain from it we will be able to draft legislation .si>ecifi- 
eally desiigne<l to cover such employment under the system in a manner that will 
take into acc"<^>unt the unique nature of farm employment. 

Mr. Si)eaker, let me interpose at this point to iK)int out that under the Senate 
provision, first of all, in order for a farmer to qualify for coverage it is neces.sary 
for him to have at least eight employees working for him in each of not less 
than 20 weeks in that year. But those are not the only employees who would 
be covered when once this trigger is released. All of his employees would be 
covered — not just those eight — but all of them would be covered. 

We had no real problem in the committee — we had no real problem in the 
conference — about covering those employees of the larger farm ojx'rations who 
are permanently or almost i)ermanently employed by the same farm employer, 
but we had a gre-at deal of difficulty in the coverage of the other sporadic em- 
ployees who would come under the program as a result of a particular employer 
being covered. 

Now, about half your farm laborers are employed in the State of California, 
and in that State the department of employment has made a study for a State 



5009 

legislative committee, and it is one of the very few that have been made. They 
point out in the study that short-term and intermittent workers play a major 
role in the production of California's crops and that even among the farm- 
workers who are firmly attached to the labor force there is chronic unemployment. 

Under the California unemployment tax the farm employers are not paying 
fully for the benefits received by unemployed farmworkers because the tax 
rates do not go up as high as the benefit cost rates for such workers. Now, that 
means, then, that the other employers within the State under the provisions of 
the Senate amendment would have to pick up the tab for a substantial portion 
of the cost of covering these farm employees. I feel that this is highly unfair 
to the other employers in the State. 

From information given to us by the Department of Labor in connection with 
our executive sessions, the benefit cost rate to provide benefits for unemployed 
farmworkers in California was estimated to be 9.5 percent, while the benefit 
cost rate for all industries in California was 2.4 percent, and bear in mind there 
is a top tax rate in that State of 3.7 i>ercent i>ermissible under the law. It 
would clearly appear from this that the benefit outgo in that State for farm cov- 
erage would amount to approximately $40 million per year, whereas agricultural 
employers, even at the maximum permissible tax rate, would contribute only 
$20 million toward that cost. Thus, other California employers would have to 
pick up the tab for the difference. 

That is just an instance of one of the many problems that exist in this whole 
area where we think it is much better for us before we finally legislate to have 
far more information than we presently have. And that we will have, in our 
opinion, as a result of the study that the conference report directs shall be made. 

Mr. Speaker, there is one amendment that we rejected in the conference that 
I am afraid — if we go back to conference — we well might have to take in order 
to have a bill at all. 

That has to do with the amendment that was offered, which is not germane 
to this subject matter, but on which the Senators were most insistent in the 
conference. That would require the Secretary of the Treasury to issue a special 
type of savings bond paying — mandatory paying — 6 percent interest. 

The Senate in this instance receded. But, if we go back, I am concerned very 
much about what might hapi>en in conference on this amendment. 

Now why am I opposed to the amendment? In the first place, the amendment 
will drain out of savings accounts which are largely held by your .savings and 
loan institutions many of the deposits in those institutions because none of them 
that I know anything about have a rate of interest over an extended period of 
time of 6 i>ercent for the duration of these savings bonds that we have in this 
amendment. 

I think many, many people will go to the extent of taking money they have 
from their .savings out of the savings and loan industry and deposit that money in 
these bonds at higher interest rates and thereby further reduce the amount of 
money that is in the savings and loan institutions that can be used for housing. 

From what members of the Committee on Banking and Currency tell me, that 
industry is already in enough of a depression without adding to it by the ac- 
ceptance of this type of amendment. 

The .second of the unrelated provisions added by the Senate amends the Securi- 
ties Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to provide that industrial 
development bonds the interest on which is excluded from gross income under 
section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 are to be exempted securities. 
The House receded with an amendment to exclude from the coverage of the 
Senate amendment bonds substantially all portions of which are to be used to 
provide residential real proixrtj- for family units or for the acquisition or 
development of land sites for an industrial park, unless such bonds would qualify 
under section 103(c) (6) of the Internal Revenue Code relating to exemption for 
certain small issues. The conferees did not intend to require registration of any 
security which is exempt from registration under existing law. Thus, the 
amendment will not change the exempt status imder section 3(a)(2) of the 
Securities Act of 1933 or section 3(a) (12) of the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 of bonds or other obligations issued by housing or mortgage finance agencies 
of States or local governments where the programs of these agencies are admin- 
istered by the agency or by the State or local government. 

Mr. Speaker, let me emphasize, if I may, the fact that the conference report 
we are voting upon today represents the culmination of many months of work on 
the part of both Houses of Congress and particularly on the part of the Commit- 



5010 

tee on Ways and Means. The legislation contained in this hill was fashioned 
during many months of work on the i>art of our committee over a period which 
starte<l 5 years ago. The committee first took up thLs legislation in 1965 when it 
held several weeks of hearings on what was the administration's proposal at that 
time. The committee went into executive session early in 1966 and rewrote that 
legislation, producing its own bill — H.R. 15119 — which was adopted by the House 
and later passed by the Senate. That legi.slation unfortunately died in conference 
over the problem of Federal standards. The Senate conferees were adamant in 
their ix)sition that the provisions relating to Federal standards that the Senate 
had adopted should remain in the bill. Tlie legislation we are now acting upon is 
basically the s-ame as the llMj(> bill. I might point out that the 1966 bill passed 
this House by a vote of 374 to 2, and the present bill passed the House on 
November 13, 1969. by a vote of 337 to 8. 

Mr. Si>eaker, the legi.slation contained in the conference reixirt enjoys broad 
.supix>rt throughout the Nation. If the conference report is not adopted, it would 
be a great loss to everyone concerned. The reforms contained in the bill relating 
to unemployment comi^ensation coverage, the extended benefit program, judicial 
review, and the bill's other provisions are desired by labor, business, and the 
State agencies that have responsibility for administering the tmemployment 
compensation program. I. therefore, urge my colleagues in the strcmgest terms 
possible not to jeopardize this legislation but to vote against any motion that may 
be made to send the conference report back to the conference committee. 

Mr. Speaker, I think the conference rei)ort should be adopted. I do not think 
it should be returned because there is always the danger that you cannot come 
back with a conference report that would be .satisfactory to all of us because this 
matter has been before the Congress now for 5 year.s. 

******* 
Mr. O'Haba. Mr. Speaker, as the distinguished chairman of the Committee 
on Ways and Means has indicated, it is my intention when the previous question 
has been agreed to on the conference report to move to recommit the bill to con- 
ference with instructions to the managers on the part of the House to agree to 
the Senate amendment which would provide unemployment insurance coverage 
of employers of farm labor who employ eight or more workers during each of 
26 or more weeks a year. It has been suggested by the chairman that a good deal 
of the hesitancy of the membership of the AVays and Means Committee and 
others who entertain doubts about this proposal was occasioned by their fear 
that the cost of the proposal would be excessive, and there was testimony before 
the committee to the effect, and I quote that testimony : 

"If Unemployment Insurance were extended to nonseasonal farmers, costs 
could run from 10 to 15 i^ercent of taxable payrolls." 

That allegation was based on an exj>erience in North Dakota. I think it is 
worthwhile to examine some information about that experience that was not 
available when thus question was before the committee. 

The North Dakota exi^erience, on which this dire prophecy has been based, 
involved 121 farmers, that is all, and the 121 farmers altogether employed 148 
workers. Not a single one of those 121 North Dakota farmers whose experience 
serves as the basis for this charge of excessive cost — not a single one of them 
would be covered by the proposal that I will make today. They were small farm- 
ers who would not be covered under this proposal. In fact, costs do not run any- 
where near that high in States where we have more experience. 

In Hawaii, the only State in which there is full coverage of farm workers under 
unemployment compensation insurance, you cannot say with exactitude what the 
cost has been for all of them, but among the i>ortion of them which have chosen 
to be self-insured, the cost has been very low— less than 2 percent of taxable 
payroll. 

In California, where a large number of big growers have elected coverage, 
the co.st has been 4.5 percent of taxable payroll. And a California study just a 
few years ago suggests that if all California farmers were covered, large and 
small the cost would be less than 10 percent. 

But even if we accepted this prophecy of high cost, is that a good reason to 
deny coverage? If the costs were going to be high, why would they be hipjh? They 
would be high becau.se unemployment is a frequent occurrence among those work- 
ers. They would l>e high for the .same reason they are high for the constniction 
industry : Because their workers are more apt to he unemployed. Are we going to 
adopt the philosophy that the only workers who ought to be covered by unemploy- 
ment insurance are those \Vho are unlikely to need such protection? 



5011 

It has been suggested also that a study will be conducted to see the best way 
of going about this. The Department of Labor in a letter signed by the former 
Assistant Secretary for Manpower, Arnold Weber, who has gone over to the 
White House staff with the former Secretary, Mr. Shultz, has indicated in 
response to a question about the need for further study : 

"The Department felt that there was sufficient data available from earlier 
studies and experience to demonstrate the feasibility of coverage of large farms. 
And Secretary of Labor Shultz so advised the Senate Committee on Finance in 
his testimony on February 5, 1970." 

Mr. Si>eaker, the unemployment insurance system was enacted into law in 1935. 
Thirty-five years ago the farm workers were excluded from coverage. I would 
think that 35 years, Mr. Speaker, is a long enough time to study the problem. 
Perliaps what we ought to do now is to provide just a little bit of coverage, and 
maybe that is the way we can learn more and the proposal I make provides very 
little coverage indeed. Less than 2 percent of all farms in America would be 
affected by this proposal. 

Mr. Bingham. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. O'Hara. I yield to the gentleman from. New York. 

Mr. Bingham. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

Could the gentleman tell us how many employees and how many farms would be 
affected by this? I am impressed that the gentleman is talking about farms of 
only very considerable size. 

Mr. O'Hara. The Department of Labor has advised us that 276,000 farm- 
workers would be benefited by this proposal. I cannot from memory give the 
gentleman the number of farms, but it would be less than 2 percent of all farms. 

Mr. Bingham. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. O'Hara. Finally, it has been suggested, Mr. Speaker, that adoption of 
this change — what I am proposing is to ask the managers on the part of the 
House to go back to the Senate conferees and take just one more provision from 
their bill — would somehow endanger the entire bill. Mr. Speaker, if I thought 
there was the slightest danger that this proposal would endanger the passage of 
this bill, I would not be in the well of the House at this minute. 

As the gentlewoman from Michigan has pointed out, unemployment is today a 
very serious problem. According to the Governor of Michigan, there are 62,000 
Michigan workers who are about to exhaust their unemployment benefits who 
need the passage of this legislation. I can assure the Members that I feel that 
need just as deeply as any Member of this House, and I would not make a pro- 
posal which would endanger the passage of this bill. Indeed this proposal does 
not do so. The Senate could hardly object to the House conferees saying we want 
to take one more provision of your bill that we did not take before. That could 
hardly endanger this proposal. 

Mr. Speaker, the time has long since passed when we oaight to show some 
indication of concern about the systematic exclusion of farmworkers from the 
laws that we have enacted to protect other workers in this country. 

Even though the farmworker is more apt to be disabled on his job than almost 
any other worker, he is covered by workmen's compensation in only five States. 

Even though the farmworker receives the lowest wages of any industrial 
worker, only some of them are coveretl by Federal minimum wage laws and 
those who are covered are covered at a rate 30 cents lower than other workers. 

Even though the farmworker is engaged in hard physical labor, the child 
labor laws which apply to every other industry do not apply to agriculture. 

Even though the farmw^orker is part of the economically weakest group in 
America, he has no legally protected right to organize and bargain collectively 
for himself, and a farmworker can be fired or blacklisted for union sympathies. 

Even though the farmworker is more apt to be out of work than any other 
worker in America, he is covered by unemployment compensation only in Hawaii 
and Puerto Rico. 

This is a modest proposal we are making here today. It is unfortunately a 
water-down version of the Nixon administration proposal of last year. It would 
cover all too few farmworkers, less than half of the total. 

But it would be a beginning, Mr. Si>eaker, a beginning that is long overdue. 

Mr. Watts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Byrnes). 

(Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.) 



5012 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, for a long time now the unemployment 
compensation laws of this country have heen in need of revision and change. We 
tried to move in that direction in ISXU), when we passed a bill in this House. At 
that time the Senate also pas.sed a bill, but no agreement could be reached in 
conference, so the much needed changes went by the board. 

We began the effort again last year, recognizing that some very important 
changes should be made in the program. Xow we liave reached an agreement on 
legislation. It pas.sed the House by an overwhelmingly large margin — IVM to 8. 
The Senate also jjassed legislation, and we went to conference on the differences. 

We have worked out the differences. We come here now with a good cojiference 
rei)ort and ask this Hou.se to accept it and not endanger enactment of these 
needed improvements by further conflicts or controversies. 

It is all well enough to .say, "This is a matter that has been agreed to as a Sen- 
ate amendment." But let us understand there were other changes which were 
made in conference, which all become opened up, if the motion to reconunit with 
instructions is agreed to. This will not go back to conference with the conferees 
limited only to this area. Let us remember that. 

All the differences that were ironed out — and I believe they were ironed out, 
so far as the Hou.>-e position is concerned, in a most satisfactory way — will be open 
again. I believe that the need for the changes we are making in this bill are so 
great that we should not jeopardize its enactment into law. 

One of the most important changes, in addition to increasing coverage for 4.7 
million workers, involved in this legislation is the i)rovisi()n for automatic ex- 
tended unemployment comi>ensation benefits. The chairman and I have been 
working for years to try to get this program written into the basic law of this 
Nation. This will finally have been done if we adopt this conference report today. 
Let us not jeopardize this goal by .sending the report back to conference. 

I speak to you as one who tried in the committee to make a start in the area 
of covering farm workers. There is no (piestion but that this is a most serious 
problem. I was hopeful we could make a start and experiment with at least 
covering employees who are comparable to the industrial employees already cov- 
ered. However, we could not arrive at a satisfactory method for doing so. I 
tried again in conference to arrive at a reasonable method of covering this type 
of farm employee. 

At the conference we were unable to reach an agreement on this issue. Let 
me emphasize that the Senate provision for covering farm employees has many 
problems. Yet if you adopt this amendment to recommit, you instruct us to take 
verbatim the amendment that the Senate adopted. Yet the Senate amendment 
is not a satisfactory basis for taking this first step toward coverage of farm em- 
ployees — a step that I want to take as soon as we can. As I sjiid. I do not see 
any difference between a large farm operation that has eight or 10 full-time 
employees throughout the year, and a nonfarm business establishment with the 
same number of emplo.vees. Let us remember, though, that the Senate bill is much 
broader than that. It covers the full-time employees, but in addition, taxes the 
emplo.ver on a lot of employees he may have on a temporary basis that will never 
qualif.v for benefits. 

I think the gentleman from Michigan should recognize the difference between 
the question of requiring an employer to pay a payroll tax on an employee, and 
the question of whether that employee is going to qualify for a benefit. In 
agriculture, we have a large numl)er of individuals who work but a very short 
time during the year— not only a short time for any one emplo.ver but in an.v 
employment. It is estimated that in IIKJS some 70 i)ercent of farm workers worked 
less than 75 days during the course of the .year. They were students and others 
who may simply have helped out at harvest time. Additionall.v, 44 ix^rcent worked 
less than 2."i days a year, and averaged about 10 days a worker during the yejir. 
You can say that you are going to cover them, but all you are doing is impo.sing 
a payroll tax on an employer for an employee who is never going to be eligible 
for benefits. Let us rtn-ognize that many of the emplo.vees who would be covered 
would never receive any l)enefits. Now, that is a good way to promise something 
and not deliver it. I believe we have to do something better than that. We cannot 
work out those problems today. 

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe it is appropriate to place an additional tax on 
an already <)verl)urdened agriculture unless we are providing a meaningful solu- 
tion to the problem. I do not think that the Senate bill does that. I hope that the 
studies and data that will soon be available — some of them under the terms of 



5013 

this bill — will provide a basis for covering agricultural employees with a con- 
tinuity of employment. 

Mr. Speaker, let me point out another problem. The administrative problems 
are most difficult in covering agricultural employment, particularly with reference 
to the interstate movement of many workers. Our attention has been directed 
to the exi)erience of the State of Hawaii. However, the State of Hawaii does not 
have the problem of workers moving from State to State, which involves de- 
termining which employers and what State funds will be charged for benefits, 
and which State law will govern the amount and duration of benefits. Those 
are problems that have to be worked out if this Congress is going to take sound 
action and exert sound judgment in this area. 

Mr. Speaker, I speak to you as one who feels most sincerely that we have to 
make an effort to solve this problem, but I do have to say what I think 
happened 

The Speaker. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin has expired. 

Mr. Mills. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman 5 additional minutes. 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. I thank the chairman of the committee for this addi- 
tional time. 

Mr. Speaker, let me say that I think the debate this afternoon on the motion 
is a good thing. It points out the interest in this subject. In my opinion it gives 
momentum to an effort to cover our farmworkers on a sound basis. Certainly, 
many of them need our help and as.sistance. They are in a sad plight. As one 
who wants to do that, let me say that it would be a mistake to place this en- 
tire bill in jeopardy by .sending it back to conference to accept a provision, writ- 
ten into the bill by the Senate, that it is not in my judgment a satisfactory 
solution. 

Mr. Speaker, if we had a latitude and time, perhaps we could work something 
out, but that is not what is being given us. The action recommended by the con- 
ferees requiring the Labor Department to give priority attention to studying the 
problems of extending coverage to agricultural workers is the course we should 
now pursue. 

There are other studies being made. also. Ohio State University and the Uni- 
versity of Connecticut are making studies in cooi)eration with the Department 
of Labor on the problem of covering the farmworker under unemployment 
compensation. 

Mr. O'Hara. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. BtiRNES of Wisconsin. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan. 

Mr. O'Hara. Mr. Speaker, I would like to just suggest to the gentleman, if I 
might, that I think the problems are not quite that difl^cult. The States decide, 
of course, who is covered and who is not covered, and we would not want to try 
to cover anyone who is not employed. 

Mr. Byrnes, of Wisconsin. Not if we say agricultural workers have to be cov- 
ered. They have to cover agricultural workers if we require it, just as they are 
going to have to cover the workers in an establi.^hment with one or more em- 
ployees in 20 weeks. The States can go further than this ; but they must at least 
meet the requirements of Federal law. 

Mr. O'Hara. If the gentleman will yield further, we do not propose to change 
the work test, that is, the individual worker's test, and in California he has to 
have earned $750 during the base period. 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. And that is why they would not get any benefits. 
The Senate amendment would tax the employer, but it would not do anything 
for this poor worker whom you and I both want to do something for. 

But I do not think it is a good argument to say just because a tax is going 
to have to be paid on his wages that he is going to receive benefits, because he 
still has all the other tests to comply with. 

Mr. O'Hara. If the gentleman will yield further, I just think that of course 
we would not want to cover the housewife who goes out to a farm to work for a 
few days, or a schoolboy who goes out to work on a farm for a few days ; that is 
not the broad coverage we are after. 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. But why tax the employer, then? Why tax the em- 
ployer on that person for that person's services? Why put that burden on 
agriculture? 

Let me yield to the chairman, if I may. 

Mr. O'Hara. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further for just one 
moment, so that I can make just one concluding statement concerning this — 
and I appreciate the sincerity of the gentleman on this matter, but I think if 



5014 

the problems were as difficult as the gentleman has described them to be here he 
would not have siipiiorted this proiKisal the way he has. 

Mr. Hyrxks of Wisconsin. I never did support the Senate proposal. I tried in 
conference to develop a worl-iable l>asis for achieving coverage. I opposed the 
Senate language and the amendment that the gentleman now wants us to be 
directed to accept. I opiK)sed that. But I did try in conference to see if we could 
not work out .some compromise. 

Mr. O'Hara. The gentlcnian did support the administration proposals, did he 
not ? 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. No. I did not. Xo, I did not. I thought there were 
problems involved with the proposal, but I thought we might possibly find a pro- 
posal we could agree on. I think at one time we did conu* fairly close to a pro- 
vision that the administration generally agreed with, and I though it was pretty 
much in keeping with what I could agree to. 

But if you are talking about the Senate version and about the conference, I 
did not support the amendment as adopted by the Senate. 

The SpEi.\KER. Tlie time of the gentleman has again expired. 

Mr. Miixs. Mr. Si>eaker, I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin. 

Mr. Si)eaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. Byrxes of Wisconsin. I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas. 

Mr. Mnxs. Mr. Speaker, I merely want to attest to the fact that I remember 
distinctly that the gentleman from Wisconsin offered certain amendments to the 
administration's proposal for the inclusion of farmworkers. The gentleman did 
not vote to support the administration's propt)sal just as it was presented to us. 
The gentleman and I both voted for amendmejits to that proposal, trying to work 
something out. 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. That is right. 

Mr. Mills. Something that would cover these i>eople who are involved here, 
but not all of the other people whom the gentleman from Michigan himself says 
he is not trying to cover, but are covered, as far as the tax is concerned. 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. That is the imixirtant part. 

Mr. Mills. That is why we tried to emphasize why we needed some study of 
the language as to just how we should do this. I think that people who are 
fully employed and employed for this length of time should be covered^ frankly, 
by these larger operations. I do not think that, because they are covered for 
these people, that now they shall be automatically taxed for everybody else who 
works, even if they work one day a year. 

Mr. Byrnes of AVisconsin. That is right. 

Mr. CoRMAN. Mr. Si)eaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. Byrnes of Wl.sconsin. I yield to the gentleman from California. 

Mr. CoRMAN. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the gentleman could tell us .specifically 
tlie differences in the Senate version and the version which the Committee on 
Ways and Means voted down, and a version which admittedly was different 
from the administration's, but more restrictive? 

Mr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. I must <-onfess to the gentleman I would not trust 
my recollec'tion now to strife the differences between them. As far as I was 
concerned I was trying to produce out something that was workable, not some- 
thing that was necessarily i>art of the administration proposal. 

Mr. CoRMAN. Mr. Si)eaker, will the gentleman yield furtlier? 

Mr. By'rnes of Wisconsin. I yield to the gentleman. 

Mr. CoRMAN. As I under.stand it, the Federal law defines "employer" and 
we leave it to the State law to define the length of time an employee must be 
employe<l to be a beneficiary. 

I do not HH-all that in the Committee on Ways and Means we had legislated as 
to a definition of "employee." Our effort was as to the "employer" admittedly. 
The motion nearly carried. 

iMr. Byrnes of Wisconsin. If the gentleman will remember, we were trying to 
develop a formula covering employers, based on the number of employees they 
had for a siKH-ific time. The actual tax liability of <'overed emi)loye«'s would have 
been further limited by exempting wages during a quarter that fell below a .speci- 
fied minimum. A higher proiK)rtion of emj>loyees on whom a tax was paid 
would, therefore, have a chance to qualify for benefits if luiemnloyed. Tender the 
Senate amendment, if an employer has eiglit employees for 20 weeks and then 
they have at some i)oint 1(X) more i>ersons for 2 weeks, he would be taxe<l on those 
100 employees who are never going to get any benefit. 



5015 

Let me just conclude by saying that I think it would be an error now to jeop- 
ardize all of the work that has been involved for at least 3 years by sending 
this back to conference. 

The Speaker. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. Mills. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Sisk). 

(Mr. Sisk asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) 

Mr. Sisk. Mr. Speaker, representing a district which would probably be affected 
to a greater extent than almost any district in America, I rise to support the 
motion which will be made by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. O'Hara). 

As one who represents a very large agricultural area, and a substantial part 
of the largest agricultural producing State in America, I recognize that there 
are problems in this situation. 

My particular area is under considerable attack at the present time and has 
been for several years in connection with farm labor. We have had peddled across 
this country a great deal of misinformation about the way we handle our farm 
labor and the wages we pay. 

I may say very frankly that I, for one, vigorously opposed the boycott which 
has been leveled, and I think most unfairly, against a group of innocent Cali- 
fornia producers. Yet, on the other hand, for all too long I think we have swept 
under the rug the problem of farm workers, the peoiile who furnish the labor to 
make it possible for us to be the best-fed Nation in the world. 

This is a subject that I have discussed at great length for a ijeriod of a num- 
ber of years with the farmers who have to pay those taxes we are talking about 
here this morning. 

Unfortunately, the decision made by the Committee on Ways and Means at 
the time that this matter was under consideration was predicated upon very 
poor information. 

I am not being critical of the gentleman from Arkansas nor of the gentle- 
man from Wisconsin (Mr. Byrnes) because I appreciate the efforts they have 
both made. They have both talked to me about this and I have discussed this with 
other members of the Committee on Ways and Means. I appreciate the efforts 
that have been made. 

Unfortunately, their decision was finally predicated upon, and decided upon, 
bad information pertaining to the State of 5s'orth Dakota. 

Over a period of 16 years, this is the first time I have appeared before the 
finance committee of the other body. I did on this occasion. 

I am not sure that I had any particular influence but I do appreciate the fact 
that they did insert the Mondale amendment which frankly is far more restric- 
tive as to coverage than that proposed by the Nixon administration. 

So it seems to me today after some 35 years, as has been recited by 
the gentleman from Michigan, there has been a lot of study in this area, a lot 
of thought given, and there has been experience. We have had exjierience in 
Oailfomia. Frankly, the experience in California in connection with those farm- 
ers who have elected to be covered has heen such as to show a far lower cost 
than that pertaining to the processing industries themselves. At present in my 
State all the processing areas are covered, the food processing plants, the pack- 
ing plants, and yet, if you are familiar with them, they operate a few months 
in the year and they are closed down the balance of the year. Yet those people 
are covered. 

We have shown from experience in California a lower cost for those farmers 
who have elected to be covered and for farmers who would fall under the pro- 
visions of this proposed amendment than the construction industry has in con- 
nection with unemployment insurance. 

There are a lot of facts, there has been a lot of study given, and I just feel that 
it is unfair to say in connection with the farmworkers, "Well, we have got to 
continue to look at it, we have got to continue to study it, we have got to sweep 
it under the rug." 

Let me say in conclusion that we are faced with a situation nationally in 
which we are simply going to have to recognize that these people are human 
beings. They are Americans. They are entitled to con-sideriation. 

We in California, of course, are faced with a serious situation today, and we 
have been faced with it for the last several years. I realize other areas of the 
country have escaped, but your time is coming. These people are entitled to 
some consideration. Our farmworkers are going union very rapidly. I think they 
have a right to bargain collectively. As the gentleman from Michigan has in- 



5016 

dicated. in most casses we have exempted them from various other laws. Now it 
seems to me that this tiny step should ho tak(>n and the time has come to take 
it. I just feel that the excuses tliat have Ikh'U offered are excuses that we should 
no longer have to live \Aith. and that this experience .^should l)e gone through with 
this very narrow coverage of less than 2 percent of the large farms in America. 

As I have sjiid. my district is covered on a i>er aapita basis by more of these 
farms than any other district in America and, therefore. I urge the adoption of 
the OHara motion in order that we might move ahead to correct .some of the 
injustice's of the past. 

Mr. McF.\i,L. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. SisK. I yield to my colleague from ralifornia. 

Mr. McF.\T.T,. I wish to commend my colleague from California for his statement 
and for his diligent work on this issue and to say that T join him on this amend- 
ment. Our districts have the same chanicteristic. We are contiguou.s. We share 
the same problems, and T believe we ne^^d this unemployment insurance coverage 
for farmworkers. 

Mr. Mri.i.s. Mr. Siieaker. I yield H minutes to the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. 
Matsunaga). 

(Mr. Matsunaga asked and was given permi.ssion to revise and extend his 
remarks.) 

Air. Edwards of California. Mr. Si^eaker. will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. Matst'xaga. T yi^-ld to the gentleman from California. 

Mr. Edwards of California. Mr. Si)eaker. today T plead with my colleagues 
to re^'onmiit the conference report on H.R. 1470"). to unemployment compen- 
sation bill, with instructions to accei^t the amendment covering a token numl)er. 
approximately 22 percent of farmworkers. This is a modest proposal and I use 
the word "plead" advisedly. T would happily deliver the.se remarks on my knees 
if that would make them mon' i)ersuasive and would not offend the decorum of 
this august place. For I tell you there is not a single action this Hou.se could take 
today that would do more to alleviate human suffering in our land and to erase an 
ancient injustice. And thereis not one argument against this action that will stand 
up under close scrutiny. But our action today will l>e scrutinize<l — and judge<l — 
by those who are familiar with the terrible hazards that are part and parcel of the 
daily lives of our farm working families, by those who are wondering whether 
such barnacle-encrustwl institutions as this can comprehend and treat the illnesises 
of our society, by that sea of young people to whom we recently extended the vote. 
But rather than appeal to the political instincts. T would direct this plea to that 
whicji is highest and best in each of u.s^ — to our concern for our fellow men. 

Perhaps my colleagues read in the Was'hington Post this week the story of 
the infant migrant child with i)us draining from its ear. sucking from a bottle 
of .sour milk. Bora of migrant fannworkers. in total innocence, in the ven' begin- 
ning of its life, it was condemned to death or to a life of mi.sery and incalcTdable 
hardship. Tn weighing the nuestion before us. it would be well if my colleagues 
would keep this image in mind, the picture of the dying migrant child. In a very 
real sense, our societ.v is responsible, we are resjjonsible. The child's fate is a con- 
sequence of our neglect and abu.se. The migrants are the most neglected and 
abusefl group in our society, and the most imixiverished. 

The question now is whether to extend unemployment compensation insurance 
to some 27r(.f)00 farmworkers on 2 i>ercent of the Nation's farms, whether to ex- 
tend to them the same protection enjoye<l by more than three-quarters of the 
workers in the T'nited States. 

.\t this moment the attention of the Nation is being focused on the plight of 
our migrant farmworkers, so T will not belabor you here with more descriptions 
of the hardships and hazards of their lives. I \v\]\ iise the time to ans^ver the 
objections that have been raisetl against this measure. 

First, the cost. The objection is that it would be too exj^ensive to administer. 
There is no evidence the cost would l)e out of line with other industries where 
coverase is taken for grantefl. But that question aside, a nation that iwiys out 
.$.'i 2 billion annually in farm .supports cannot in good conscience deny this 
minimum benefit to its farmworkers. In California's Central Valley last year, 
seven major farm corporations received an aggregate of .$14 million in farm sup- 
port.s. The Washington Post story- referred to al>ove pointed out that the Federal 
CJovernment smmt !';410.000 on migrant health .services in two counties in Texas 
during fiscal IfK^T. During that same period, in the .«ame area, tlie Government 
spent ."V^.r.O 4.000 on eradication of disea.s)e in animals. In fl'^-al lOfW). the disparity 
was even greater — IR.'W.OTT for migrant health and $r»,.^)02,000 to control animal 



5017 

diseases. Such shameful comparisons are plentiful. Since only 2 i>ercent of the 
Nation's farms would be affected, hardship to the farms is hardly a valid objec- 
tion. The third and final objection — that the mobility of the migrant would make 
it difficult if not imix»ssible for State and Federal agencies to administer the 
program — is equally invalid but deserves to be answered in some detail. 

The popular conception of tJie migrant farmworker is that he is continuously 
on the road. That is not the case. Most migrant families travel only 4 or 5 months 
of the year. The remaining 7 or 8 months they maintain a permanent or semi- 
permanent residence in their home State. Furthermore, 67 percent of all man- 
days of agricultural employment are attributed to regular and year-round farm- 
workers. Many of those who do not work full time on large commercial farms 
find employment in nonfarm jobs near their homes to complete their year- 
roxind employmenit. The migrant farm family then, is mobile but not rootless. 
It seeks as much stability as its i^erilous occupation will allow. By extending 
unemployment insurance to this group the Government would enhance its sta- 
bility. The long range benefits both to the farm working families and to society 
as a whole are obvious. By increasing their stability we would enable their chil- 
dren to have the same continuity in education that the children of other workers 
enjoy — ^a continuity that is essential to .scholastic success and eventual upward 
mobility. 

Mechanization is further disrupting the migrant way of life, forcing families 
out of the migrant stream and into urban ghettos where, if they cannot compete 
successfully for the limited number of unskilled jobs available, they must go on 
welfare to survive. For many this marks the beginning of family demoralisjation 
and disintegration, with all of the attendant social evils of "generational dei)en- 
dency" and delinquency. From a social point of view, from a government point 
of view, from a human jwint of view, this is a far more expensive course than the 
one proposed. We can help break that iiattern by extending to these farmworkers 
unemployment insurance. It will give them the stability all people need to better 
their circumstances. It will help them to become full-fledged members of a perma- 
nent community. 

No occupation is more hazardous than that of the farmworker, who must often 
take his wife and sons and daughters into the fields to eke out enough income 
to survive the full year. In 1967 there were 2.700 fatal accidents and 230,000 
disabling injuries in agriculture. The percentage increases in fatalities and 
disabling injuries in farmwork led all other industries during the past 10 years. 
In California, a major agricultural State, the occupational disease rate among 
farmworkers in 1967 was more than 50 percent higher than the next leading 
industry and three times higher than the average of all other industries. 

But neither statistics nor rational arguments will prevail against closed 
minds and hearts, so once again I appeal to the humanity of my colleagues. The 
cost of our failure to act will quite literally be paid in human lives. The cost of 
our approving this action will be small compared to the benefits to farmworkers 
and to the larger .society. 

(Mr. Edwards of California asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.) 

Mr. Matsunaga. Mr. Speaker, as a Representative from the only State which 
extends unemployment compensation to agricultural workers on a mandatory 
basis, I rise in support of the motion to recommit to be offered by the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. O'Hara) with instructions to accept the Senate amend- 
ment. 

Mr. Speaker, the proposal is a modest one. less extensive, in fact, than what 
the administration itself has proposed. Only farm employers with eight or more 
workers each, employed for 2(J or more weeks would fall under the coverage. The 
so-called family farm will not be included. 

The major objection to this proposal is not farmworkers do not deserve to be 
covered, for the virtues of farm workers have been extolled unanimously by 
Members of this body. It is not that the program would l>e difficult to administer, 
for the administration itself has proposed an even more exten.sive program. The 
objection is that the cost will be too high. 

Let us. then, look at Hawaii's experience. Hawaii's experience shows that the 
cost to the farm employer has been les.s — I repeat — has been less than to the 
nonfarm employer. In 1964, for example, it was 1 percent to the farm employer. 

On the basLs of percentage of the payroll, as compared to 1.6 percent to the 
nonfarm employer. In 1965 and 1966 the figures were 1 percent for farm em- 



5018 

ployment and 1.3 percent for nonfarm employment. In 1967 and 1968, for farm 
employment 1.1 percent of payroll, and for nonfarm employment 1.6 ijercent. So 
the exi>erience of the only State, which for 11 years now has had mandatory un- 
employment comi>ensation for asricultnral workers, shows that the cost is far 
less in the agricultnnil indnstry than in nonasricnltural industry. This, I believe, 
ought to dispel all fear.s on the part of Memln^rs who feel that this program 
would he too costly to be borne by farm employers. 

Mr. Meeds. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. Matsunaga. I gladly yield to the gentleman from Washington. 

Mr. Meeds. Mr. Speaker, there has been much ado made here over the fact 
that once the employer is covered, he is going to have to pay for employees who 
do not reach the coverage stage themselves, but is not the same thing true with 
the industrial employers today who are covered? Once they reach the coverage, 
they pay for all their people based on their payroll and not on how often i)eople 
work. Is that not true in industry too? 

Mr. Matsunaga. The gentleman is correct. In that connection, I might point 
out that the law presently covers building and road construction workers, and 
the cost is as high as 10 percent of the total payroll, including seasonal workers. 
Certainly no one would suggest that coverage of these construction workers 
should be discontinued because of the high cost. 

Even with l."),463 seasonal workers in the pineapple industry in Hawaii, the 
cost to the employer has been as low as 1.1 percent. This low cost experience in 
Hawaii's 11-year history of unemployment comi>ensation for agricultural work- 
ers would seem to indicate that the cost of extending coverage to agricultural 
workers as proposed in the Senate amendment would be far less than in the 
construction industry. For this reason, Mr. Speaker, the agricultural worker 
should be granted equal consideration. 

Acceptance of the Senate amendment would be a precedent but important first 
step toward giving eciual treatment, long overdue to the agricultural worker 
who forms the backbone of our Nation's economy. 

Mr. CoR>fAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. Matsuxaga. I yield to the gentleman from California. 

Mr. CoRMAN. Mr. Spx^aker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

I have refreshed my memory on what was said by the gentleman from Wi.s^ 
cousin. There is a difference in the Senate version from that which we voted on 
in the committee, there was a substantial support in that committee for cover- 
ing employers who employed eight employees for 26 weeks. Second, we did restrict 
the people covered to those who earned at least ,$7r)0 i>er quarter. There would 
be almo!?t no hardship to anybody with or without that limitation. Certainly 
it is a badly neede<l improvement in the field of farm labor. If we are going to 
to be able to solve our farm labor problems in an orderly fashion, we are going 
to have to extend the same kind of protection to them that we do to the indus- 
trial workers. 

Mr. Speaker, I urge a yes vote on the O'Hara motion. 

Mr. Watts. Mr. Speaker. I yield myself 8 minutes. 

Mr. Six'aker. we passed this bill, as has been said heretofore, through this 
House by a large majority. It was passed by the Senate and. among other things, 
an amendment was put in it. that was ill-conceived, which covers farmers. Cer- 
tainly everybody recognizes that there are many farm laborer.s who, under the 
right kinds of conditions and after appropriate legislation has been enacted, 
are entitled to the same coverage as some employees of other industries. But 
this motion that .s'hall be made will adopt a hodge-podge amendment put in b.v 
the Senate that will not do w^hat its T>roponents think it will do and will work a 
tremendous hardship on the farming industry. 

Mr. Speaker, we went to conference. We agreed unanimously, both the Senate 
and the House, on a conference report that extends coverage under our unem- 
I)lovment compensation systetn to practically 5 million more people. 

In our report we ordere<l that the Department of La])or make an expenditious 
and extensive study of the prof)er way to cover farm labor, so that it will not 
be a tremendous inii>ediment to our farmers and so that it will do something 
to help those farm laborers who work for long times and then are laid off from 
work. 

I am sure that they will come forth with a soimd program, and i)erhaps one 
we can live with. 

In addition to that, in Connecticut a universitv is making a study of the same 
.situation. Ohio T'niversity is making a study of the same situation. 

I beg the Members not to go off half cocke<l and adopt something that all of 
us are going to be sorry was adopted. 



5019 

Certainly, to put the farmers under unemployment compensation would cost 
a tremendous sum of money, close to 10 percent of payroll. I do not know any- 
tliing about the situation in Hawaii. Perhaps there is plenty of work tiiere for 
the farmers the year round. But that is not the testimony before us by all the 
State agencies. The Interstate Conference, which represents all the adminis- 
trators of employment security, meets, and they adopt recommendations that 
Congress should enact and that the States should enact. They testified before 
(lur committee and they said that of all the propositions that were before that 
(■(inference the one which was most certainly adopted was to not put farmworkers 
under compensation at this time until a further study was made and a sound 
method had been developed for putting them under it. 

What would be done if we put the big farmers under it? Right off the reel, 
there will be a big scramble such as is going on today for farm labor. Nearly 
all of our farm labor has moved to industry as it is. What will happen is that 
there would be four or five big farmers in a little community, perhaps under it, 
and all the rest of the farmers, the little ones like me, would be out from under 
it. The little ones will have the toughest problem in the world of getting any 
part of that farm labor to work for us, because the other boys are going to have 
unemployment compensation. They are going to flock to the places where, after 
they work for a series of farmers for 13 weeks — and farming is the most sea- 
sonal of all occupations — they can then draw unemployment compensation for 
26 weeks. 

I want to reiterate again that once a fanner gets under this, under the Senate 
amendment, every child and every woman that he employs even for 1 day or 
1 week, outside of the eight who qualified him. he is certainly going to have to 
pay for, as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Byrnes) correctly stated. He 
will pay a tax on them, but they cannot draw anything unless they work for 
him and other farmers long enough to qualify, say, for example, for IS weeks. 

The point was made that this is the same as it is in other industries. Cer- 
tainly it is. But tile farming industry is a very seasonal industry, whereas an 
industrial-type industry is not. People usually do not shut down plants during 
the course of a year. 

But in respect to harvesting, the wheat harvest, the grape harvest, the tobacco 
harvest or whatever harvest one might have, it is necessary to call in a lot of 
extra help. They must have them at that time. They may not need them through- 
out the year, and they do not need them. But they will have to i>ay a tax on them 
just the same, and the workers will get no benefit. 

Or, if they are able to work for a total of 13 weeks, which would probably take 
them through that harvest season, then what would happen? They would im- 
mediately be out of work and they would draw unemployment compensation for 
26 weeks. Then they could rest for 13 weeks more, and that year would be 
gone. Then probably they can get another job during the harvest season to cover 
13 weeks, and you go through the same rigamarole. There are a great many com- 
plications, but after we get the information we need it can be worked out. The 
time is not right now, until we get the benefit of these studies. If you put them 
under it now, it will just create chaos. The farmers cannot afford to pay the 10 
percent. So what are you going to do? You will make tremendous deficit em- 
ployers out of them, and you will take every little merchant and every manu- 
facturer and everybody else now under unemployment paying taxes and you will 
have to go back to the States and precipitately raise those rates of unemploy- 
ment tax on people who are not creating the problem in order to pay for those 
seasonal workers who as soon as the harvest is over are out of work. Moreover, 
any State that wants to do it today can do so. They can put farmers under it. 
But that is different from forcing them under it. The Interstate Conference ac- 
tion shows that none of them wanted it. It has been tried and found wanting 
and will not work. I say to you it would be a mistake to do it and to run the 
risk of delaying this conference report when many States today are practically 
out of unemployment compensation- AVe do have a triggering device for ex- 
tended benefits in here that will be badly needed, if it is not needed now, in many 
instances. 

Mr. TiiNNEY. Mr. Speaker, I am voting today to recommit H.R. 14705, the un- 
employment compensation conference reijort, with instructions to extend cover- 
age to farmworkers. 

The unemployment insuran^ce coverage which was proposed to the Congress 
on July 8, 1969, would affect more farm employers and farmworkers in Cali- 
fornia than in any other State. Nearly half of the workers who would be cov- 
ered are employed in California. 



5020 

Thus I think that it should be of substantial interest to the House that farm 
employers in California are increasingly in favor of Federal unemployment in- 
surance coverage of farmworkers. 

There are a number of reasons for the increasing supiJort for unemployment 
insurance coverage on the part of California farm employers. An imiwrtant 
factor is their concern that they may be placed at an interstate competitive cost 
di.sjidvantage in .selling their produce, if California pjisses a farm coverage law 
or if they elect to cover their workers. 

Thus, in a .statement submitted to the House Ways and Means Committee on 
behalf of approximately 12, (MK) citrus and av(K'ado producers in Arizona and 
California, the executive vice president of the Agriculture Producers Labor Com- 
mitttH> stated : 

"One argument in favor of extending farm coverage on a national basis is 
that California's cotton, meat, poultry, chec-^e, wine, citrus, tomatoes, vegetables 
and melons must be marketed in competition with the same products from 
other states; that national coverage will eliminate an element of unfair competi- 
tion between the states in the marketing of these product.s." 

Also, many California employers have found that unemployment insurance is a 
highly worthwhile i)art of their labor-management relaticms. Hence, some 7(>5 
farm employers have voluntarily elected to cover their 1H,(KM) worker.s. They 
have found that unemployment insurance .^^tabilizes their labor force and re.sults 
in reduced costs of recruitment and turnover. In other words, their exi)erience 
has been similar to that of nonagricultural employers. And, the.se emi)loyers have 
found that the cost of unemployment insurance coverage for their workers has 
been moderate. In 1JX>8 the benetit cost rate was only 4.5 i)ercent of taxable 
wages. They have found that they are better able to compete with nonagricul- 
tural employers in attracting workers. 

Coverage under unemployment insurance would properly place the cost of 
fluctuations in farm employment on the unemployment insurance program which 
was designed for that very i>urpo.se. Unfortunately, much of the c(Kst of farm 
unemployment is now met under the welfare program. I know that the House is 
deeply bothered by the rapidly rising costs of that program. 

A change to farmworker coverage under the luiemployment insurance program 
would place covered farmworkers in a more equitable iK>sition vis-a-vis the great 
majority of other workers, in that entitlement to income during .si^ells of unem- 
ployment would be an earned right under an in.surance program, rather than a 
welfare grant based on need. 

I urge that H.R. 14705 be amended to provide for coverage of agricultural 
workers, at least to the extent recommended by the President. 

Mr. T.\LcoTT. Mr. Si)eaker, my State of California provides more benefits for 
the' farmworker, i>ermanent and migrant, than any other State. Working ccmdi- 
tions, living c(mditions, housing, and wages are l>etter in California than most 
every other State. Even so all of these factors could be imi)roved — and should be. 

There should be a system of unemployment <'ompensation for farmworkers — 
all farmworkers. 

I have introduced legi-slation to provide benefits for farmworkers throughout 
the Vnited States comparable to the benefits provided in California. 

The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. O'Hara) has made an emotional api>eal 
for unemployment comi)ensati(m for farmworkers. In the past his recommen- 
dations in the farm labor field have prejudiced the farmworker and agriculture 
in general. 

This problem is urgent. I>egi.slation is necessary. But facts are more persuasive 
than emotional oratory. 

California has studied this problem seriously for some time and has not yet 
devised a satisfactorj- system. Before we pa.ss a Federal law on this subject, we 
should know a lot more about the facts. 

I therefore opix>se any parliamentary motion which on the face appears to 
benefit farmworkers, but which in fact is ill considered, inadequately .studied, 
and not ready f(»r delil>eration by the Hou.se. 

The chairman, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Mills), and the ranking 
member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Byrnes) have made persuasive 
arguments for considering the subject of unemployment compensation for farm- 
workers at a later time to avoid jeopardizing this important bill which is so 
necessary to so many unemployed workers. 

For tho.se who really want to help the unadvantaged farmworker, they can 
advocate and vote for many other wellknown working benefits — minimum wage, 
disability insurance, better hours and working conditions — which are wholly in- 
adequate in most States. 



5021 

The proposal for nationwide unemployment compensation for farmworkers 
is not ready for passage today. It requires more experience and study — but I 
hope it will come soon. 

Mr. Leggett. Mr. Speaker, I have here in my hand a resolution by the Associated 
Farmers of California, Inc. It says, in part : 

"Whereas, farm labor in California falls into two general categories : the per- 
manent worker and the seasonal or migratory worker, and 

"Whereas, the former does not need unemjiloyment insurance and the seasonal 
worker's motivation would be lost with unemployment insurance. 

"Now therefore be it resolved that the Associated Farmers of California, Inc. 
will vigorously oppose in principle any legislation designed to include farm work- 
ers under any program of Unemployment Insurance." 

I have heard untenable arguments before, but I must say this one wins the 
mink-lined bathtub. 

The farmers say permanent agricultural workers do not need unemployment 
compensation because their jobs are i)ermanent. Clerks and engineers and civil 
servants and a lot of other ijeople have "permanent" jobs too, but sometimes 
they turn out to be not all that permanent. That is what unemployment com- 
pensation is for. If we were to follow the Associated Farmers' reasoning, we 
would have to cancel the entire compensation program for everybody. 

The second reason given, that seasonal workers would lose their motivation, 
is just as ridiculous. The payments will be better than nothing, but they will be 
small indeed. And they will not continue for more than half a year. 

If anyone feels that farmworkers are naturally lazy, that they will work less 
if unemployment money is available to them — I suggest you try this kind of 
work for awhile. It is the most grueling, backbreaking work I know of. Whatever 
else one may say about farmworkers, they are not lazy. 

Before I go any further, I do not want to appear to be attacking farmers in 
general. The Associated Farmers are only one group. Others are more humane 
and enlightened. The California Farm Burefau in Yolo County, for example, 
favors a national compulsory unemployment insurance program. 

Mr. Speaker, this is something the country needs, and it is a disgrace we did 
not have it a long time ago. I commend President Nixon and the Labor Depart- 
ment for their stand. 

The treatment of farm laborers in this country is something none of us can 
regard with anything but shame. If there is anyone who was not aware of the 
inhuman conditions under which farm laborers live and work. Senator Mondale's 
current hearings should be eye openers. 

We all know there is only one reason why farm laborers get the short end 
time after time : they are not ix)werful politically. We have kept them uneducated, 
poor, disorganized, and beat down, and there has not been much they could do 
to press their case. They cannot throw cocktail parties or contribute to cam- 
paigns. Most of them cannot even vote. This is going to change, and as far as I 
am concerned, the sooner the better. 

But right now, we have to give them this unemployment insurance. It will 
not solve their problems. But it will help. They need it and, as a matter of jus- 
tice, there is no defensible reason for denying it to them. 

The Speaker. All time has expired. 

Mr. Mills. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the conference report. 

The previous question was ordered. 

MOTION TO RECOMMIT OFFERED BY MR. O'HARA 

Mr. O'Hara. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit. 

The Speaker. Is the gentleman opposed to the conference report? 

Mr. O'Hara. I am, in its present form ; Mr. Speaker. 

The Speaker. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

"Mr. O'Hara moves to recommit the conference report on the bill H.R. 14700 
to the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses with 
instructions to the managers on the part of the House to agree to Senate 
Amendment No. 9 extending unemployment compensation to agricultural labor 
employed by persons who employ eight or more workers during each of 26 or 
more weeks.' 

Mr. Mills. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the motion to 
recommit. 

The previous question was ordered. 

The Speaker. The question is on the motion to recommit. 

36-513 O — 71 — Pt. 8-A 4 



5022 



The question was taken : and the Speaker announced that the noes appeared 
to have it. 

Mr. OHara. Mr. Sjjeaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is 
not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. 

The Speaker. Evidently a quorum is not present. 

The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will notify absent 
Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. 

The question was taken ; and there were — yeas 170, nays 219, not voting 42, 
as follows : 

[Roll No. 231] 



Adams 

Addabbo 

Anderson. Calif. 

Annunzio 

Ashley 

Barrett 

Bell. Calif. 

Bennett 

Biaggi 

Biester 

Bingham 

Blatnik 

Boland 

Boiling 

Brademas 

Brasco 

Brooks 

Brown, Calif. 

Burton, Calif. 

Button 

Byrne, Pa. 

Carey 

Celler 

Clark 

Clay 

Cohelan 

Conte 

Conyers 

Corman 

Culver 

Daniels, N.J. 

de la Garza 

Delaney 

Dent 

Diggs 

Dingell 

Donohue 

Dulski 

Dwyer 

Eckhardt 

Edmondson 

Edwards, Calif. 

Eilberg 

Evans, Colo. 

Farbstein 

Fascell 

Feighan 

Flood 

Foley 

Ford, William D. 

Fraser 

Friedel 

Fulton, Pa. 

Fulton, Tenn. 

Garmatz 

Gaydos 

Giaimo 



YEAS— 170 

Gibbons 

Gonzalez 

Green, Pa. 

Gude 

Halpern 

Hamilton 

Hanley 

Han.sen, Idaho 

Hansen, Wash. 

Harrington 

Hathaway 

Hawkins 

Hays 

Hechler, W. Va. 

Heckler, Mass. 

Hel.stoski 

Hicks 

Holifield 

Horton 

Howard 

H ungate 

Jacobs 

Johnson, Calif. 

Karth 

Kastenmeier 

Kluczynski 

Koch 

Kyros 

Leggett 

Long, Md. 

Lowenstein 

Lujan 

McCarthy 

McFall 

Macdonald, Mass. 

Madden 

Mathias 

Matsunaga 

Meeds 

Melcher 

Meskill 

Mikva 

Miller, Calif. 

Minish 

Mink 

MoUohan 

Monagan 

Moorhead 

Morgan 

Morse 

Mosher 

Moss 

Murphy, 111. 

Xedzi 

Nix 

Obey 

O'Hara 



O'Konski 

Olsen 

O'Neill, Mass. 

Patten 

Pelly 

Pepper 

Pettis 

Philbin 

Pike 

Podell 

Price, 111. 

Pucinski 

Quie 

Rail.s.back 

Randall 

Rees 

Reid, N.Y. 

Reifel 

Reuss 

Riegle 

Robison 

Rodino 

Roe 

Rooney, N.Y. 

Rooney, Pa. 

Ro.senthal 

Roybal 

Ruppe 

St (I'ermain 

Scheuer 

Sisk 

Smith, Iowa 

Staggers 

Stanton 

Stokes 

Sullivan 

Symington 

Thompson, N.J. 

Tiernan 

Tunney 

Udall 

Van Deerlin 

Vanik 

Vigorito 

Waldie 

Watkins 

Whalen 

Wilson, Charles H. 

Wolff 

Wright 

Wyatt 

Wydler 

Yates 

Yatron 

Zablocki 

Zwach 



5023 



NAYS— 219 



Abbitt 

Abernethy 

Adair 

Albert 

Alexander 

Anderson, III. 

Andrews, Ala. 

Andrews, N. Dak. 

Arends 

Ashbrook 

Aspinall 

Ay res 

Beall, Md. 

Belcher 

Berry 

Betts 

Bevlll 

Blackburn 

Blanton 

Boggs 

Bow 

Bray 

Brinkley 

Broomfleld 

Botzman 

Brown, Mich. 

Brown, Ohio 

Broyhill, N.C. 

Broyhill, Va. 

Buchanan 

Burke, Mass. 

Burleson, Tex. 

Burlison, Mo. 

Bush 

Byrnes, Wis. 

Cabell 

Camp 

Carter 

Casey 

Cederberg 

Chamberlain 

Chappell 

Clancy 

Clausen, Don H. 

Clawson, Del. 

Cleveland 

Collier 

Collins 

Colmer 

Conable 

Corbett 

Coughlin 

Cowger 

Crane 

Daniel, Va. 

Davis, Wis. 

Dellenback 

Denney 

Dennis 

Derwinski 

Devine 

Dickinson 

Downing 

Duncan 

Edwards, Ala. 



Erlenborn 

Esch 

Eshleman 

Evins, Tenn. 

Fallon 

Findley 

Fish 

Fisher 

Flowers 

Flynt 

Ford, Gerald R. 

Foreman 

Fountain 

Frelinghuysen 

Frey 

Fuqua 

Galifianakis 

G«ttys 

Goldwater 

Goodling 

Green, Oreg. 

Griffin 

Griffiths 

Gross 

Grover 

Gubser 

Hagan 

Haley 

Hall 

Hammerschmidt 

Harsha 

Harvey 

Hastings 

Hubert 

Henderson 

Hogan 

Hull 

Hunt 

Hutchinson 

Jarman 

Johnson, Pa. 

Jonas 

Jones, Ala. 

Jones, N.C. 

Kazen 

Kee 

Keith 

Kleppe 

Kuykendall 

Kyi 

Landgrebe 

Landrum 

Langen 

Latta 

I^nnon 

Lloyd 

McClory 

MeCloskey 

McClure 

MeCulloch 

McDade 

McDonald, Mich. 

McEwen 

McKneally 

McMillan 



Mahon 

Mann 

Marsh 

Martin 

May 

Mayne 

Michel 

Miller, Ohio 

Mills 

Minshall 

Mize 

Mizell 

Montgomery 

Morton 

Myers 

Natcher 

Nelsen 

Nichols 

O'Neal, Ga. 

Passman 

Patman 

Perkins 

Pirnie 

Poage 

Poff 

Preyer, N.C. 

Price, Tex. 

Pry or. Ark. 

Purcell 

Quillen 

Reid, 111. 

Rivers 

Roberts 

Rogers, Fla. 

Rostenkowski 

Roth 

Rousselot 

Ruth 

Sandman 

Satterfield 

Saylor 

Schadeberg 

Scherle 

Schmitz 

Schneebeli 

Schwengel 

Scott 

Sebelius 

Shipley 

Shriver 

Sikes 

Skubitz 

Slack 

Smith, Calif. 

Smith, N.Y. 

Snyder 

Springer 

Stafford 

Steed 

Steiger, Ariz. 

Steiger, Wis. 

Stephens 

Stubblefield 

Taft 

Talcott 



Taylor 

Tea{?ne, Calif. 
Teagiie, Tex. 
Thomp.son. Ga. 
Thom-on, V/is. 
rUnian 
A'andor .lajit 
Waggoiiner 



Aiulpr«:on, Tenn. 

Baring 

Brock 

Burke, Fla. 

Burton, I'tah 

Caffery 

Chi.sholm 

Cramer 

Cunningham 

Daddario 

Davis, Ga. 

Dawson 

Dorn 

Dowdy 



5024 

Warn pier 

Wat.sou 

Watts 

Whelley 

White 

Whitehurst 

Whitten 

Widnall 

NOT V0TIXG--i2 

Ewards, La. 

Gallagher 

Gilbert 

Gray 

Hanna 

Hornier 

Ichord 

Jones, Tenn. 

King 

Kirwan 

Long, La. 

Lukens 

MacGregor 

Mailliard 



Wiggins 

Williams 

Winn 

Wold 

Wylie 

Wyman 

Young 

Zion 



Murphy, N.Y. 

Ottinger 

Pickle 

Pollock 

Powell 

Rarick 

Rhodes 

Rnger.s, Colo. 

Roudebush 

Ryan 

Stratton 

Stuckey 

Weicker 

Wilson, Bob 



So the motion to recommit was rejected. 

The Clerk announced the following pairs : 

On this vote : 

Mr. Hanna for, with Mr. Long of Louisiana against. 

Mr. Ryan for, with Mr. Rarick against. 

Mr. Daddario for, with Mr. Pickle against. 

Mr. Murphy of New York for, with Mr. Edwards of Louisiana against. 

Mr. Gilbert for, with Mr. Dorn against. 

^Ir. Gallagher for, with Mr. Jones of Tennessee against. 

Mr. Gray for, with Mr. Dowdy against. 

Mr. Dawson for, with Mr. King against. 

Mr. Kirwan for, with Mr. Rhodes against. 

Mr. Ottinger for, with Mr. Bob Wilson against. 

Mrs. Chisholm for, with Mr. Cunningham against. 

Mr. Powell for, with Mr. Burke of Florida again.st. 

Until further notice : 

Mr. Anderson of Tennessee with Mr. Brock. 

Mr. Ichord with Mr. Burton of Utah. 

Mr. Baring with Mr. Cramer. 

Mr. Davis of Georgia with Mr. Roudebush. 

Mr. Rogers of Colorado with Mr. Hosmer. 

Mr. Stuckey with Mr. Mailliard. 

Mr. Weicker with Mr. Pollock. 

Mr. MacGregor with Mr. Lukens. 

Mr. Stratton with Mr. Caffery. 

Mr. Hebert changed his vote from "yea" to "nay." 

Mr. Lujan changed his vote from "yea" to "nay." 

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. 



[Press release] 

Mondale-Saxbe Effort To Reject the Conference Report on H.R. 14705 and 
Return to Conference With Instructions 

We are requesting that the Senate vote against the Conference Report on 
H.R. 1470."), a hill which extends coverage and improves benefits for f-ome 
wor'ers undpr the unemployment compensation system. 

We do this not because we are opposed to the provision.s in the bill. In fact, 
we support them in these times of economic insecurity and rising unemployment. 



5025 

We urge rejection of tiie Conference Report because we think that the pro- 
visioas adopted by the Senate extending coverage of unemployment compen- 
sation to tarm employers who have eight or more empioyees in each of 
26 weeks during the year should not have been abandoned in conference. 

We think it was most unfortunate that fiarm worker coverage was dropped 
in conierence. The farmworker coverage adopted by the Senate was a very 
modest beginning. In fact, only two percent of all farm employees — approxi- 
mately 22,000— and twenty percent of all farm employees— approximately 
250,000— would be affected by this provision. Relatively few and only the larger 
agriculture businesses would be covered, and not the small family farmer. This 
does not go as far as the Administration proposal which called for coverage 
of farm employers who have four or more employees in each of 20 different weeks 
during the year. 

The great majority of the working force is covered by unemployment com- 
pensation — over SO percent of all jobs. Coverage of farmworkers is entirely 
feasible according to existing studies. Record keeping presents no new^ obstacle, 
as the agribusinesses involved are already covered under other federal and 
state laws requiring records. There is no justification for failing to include 
farmworkers under the coverage of unemployment compensation. 

We therefore urge rejection of the Conference Report. If successful, we 
will request that a new conference be convened and that the Senate conferees 
insist on the farmworker provisions adopted by the Senate. 



[Excerpts from the Congressional Record, Aug. 4, 1970] 
Federal-State Unemployment Compensation Program — Conference Report 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of conference on 
the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the 
bill — H.R. 14705 to extend and improve the Federal-State unemployment com- 
pensation program. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of 
the report. 

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Bellmon). The report will be read for the infor- 
mation of the Senate. 

The legislative clerk read the report. 

(For conference report, see House proceedings of May 5, 1970, H3861, Con- 
gressional Record. ) 

The Presiding Officer. Is there objection to the present consideration of the 
report? 

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the report. 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the conference report. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

PRLVILEGE of THE FLOOR 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Frank J. Crowley. 
Education and Public Welfare Division, Legislative Reference Service, Library of 
Congress, be granted the privileges of the floor during the debate and considera- 
tion of the conference report on H.R. 14705. the Employment Security Amend- 
ments of 1970. 

The Presiding Officer. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, this is the conference report on the Employment 
Security Amendments of 1970. The bill passed the Senate on April 7, 1970. by a 
vote of 77 to 0. However, before passing the bill the Senate amended it in 43 
respects. 

Basically, the bill has three principal features. First, it extends coverage of the 
unemployment compensation program to more than 4.700.000 additional jobs. 
Second, it establishes a i>ermanent program of extended benefits for people who 
exhaust their regular State benefits during periods of high unemployment. 
And. third, it improves the financing of the unemployment comi)eiisation program. 
In the process, the bill also makes a number of relatively minor changes in admin- 
istrative aspects of the unemployment comiiensation system. 

While the Senate made a total of 43 changes in the House text, the large major- 
ity of these changes were not controversial : rather they were necessitated because 
of the passage of time since the bill passed the House. Senators will recall that 



5026 

the Tax Reform Act was before the Senate in November of last year when the 
House acted on this unemployment comi^nsation bill. 

I believe it is fair to say tliat there are only seven significant amendments 
in the bill— two of these were floor amendments, four were committee amend- 
ments and the last one involved a floor mollification of a committee amendments 
and the last one involved a floor modification of a committee amendment. Of these, 
the Senate receded on four and the House receded on three. Virtually all of the 
remaining Senate amendments were agreed to by the House. , .' 

Agricu'tural employees: The most important of the Senate 'amendments 
would have extended coverage of the unemployment insurance system to large 
farms, .specifically those employing eight or more workers in each of 26 different 
weeks during the last year. This Senate amendment would have added 275.000 
jobs and 23.000 employers to the unemployment compensation program. The 
Secretary of Labor testified before the committee that this extension of coverage 
was the most important unresolved issue in the House bill. I was g'ad the Finance 
Committee and the Senate were willing to extend the protection of the .system to 
employees of large farms, and I vigorously defended the committee bill on the 
floor. Unfortunately, we were not able to persuade the House conferees to accept 
the Senate amendment or any part of it. They advised us that after the most 
careful deliberation, they had rejected similar amendments in the House Ways 
and Means Committee and under those circumstances they were not willing to 
have it now thrust on them as a Senate amendment. On this important question 
the on'y concession we were able to obtain from the House conferees was to make 
the coverage of agricultural workers the top priority in a special study of the 
unemployment compensation system called for in another provision of the bill. 

rif * * * * :<: 4c 

A number of Senators have announced that they wiU make an effort to defeat 
the conference report and demand a further conference with the House on the 
question of coverage of agricu'tural workers. 

This matter had not been dealt with by the House. But Senators will recall, 
the Finance Committee added amendments to the House-passed version extend- 
ing the coverage of the unemp'oyment insurance system to emp'ovees of large 
farms — those employing eight or more farmworkers in each of 26 different weeks 
during the year. In extending this coverage, however, the Finance Committee 
carved out an exception for farmworkers employed by "crew leaders" — those 
who shepherd migratory workers from job to job across State lines as the plant- 
ing and harvesting seasons come and go. 

It was the committee's thought that this exception was es.sentiai if we were 
to devise a workable p^an for adding agricultural employees to the unemp'oy- 
ment compensation program. We were convinced that providing coverage for 
migratory workers raised problems for which we had no solution at this time. We 
felt that experience with the coverage of a limited group of regu'ar farmworkers 
might provide experience that wou'd enable us to work out a plan in the future 
for bringing migratory workers under the system. 

Unfortunately, the Senate was not willing to agree to the committee p'an. 
Rather, it in.sisted on immediately bringing migratory workers within the farm 
coverage pro\'ision. The senior Senator from Delaware, who is also the ranking 
minority member of the committee, advised the Senate when it was considering 
that amendment of the many problems Involved. He .said it raised problems we 
cou'd not solve. I. too. advi.sed the Senate that there were problems with respect 
to the coverage of migratory workers for which we had no answers. 

It was not a lack of compassion that prompted the committee to omit the 
coverage of these workers. It was very practical administrative problems. I 
predicted at the time the Senate agreed to the migratory worker amendment that 
we wou'd not be ab'e to solve the problems of the migratory worker in confer- 
ence. As it turned out, my prediction was true. 

As a matter of fact, the addition of the migratory worker amendment in the 
Senate solidified the opposition to coverage of any farmworkers at this time. 
The House conferees raised a number of questions about the Senate amendment 
which we could not answer. 

Ever since the Federal-State sy.stem of unemployment insurance began, cover- 
age of farmworkers has generally been thought of as a desirable objective. And, 
every time that farmworker coverage has been proposed, we have been told that 
the administrative problems are too great and that time is needed for a study 
of the matter. 



5027 

In the years that have gone by, some limited coverage of farmworkers has 
been provided in several jurisdictions and studies of the problems involved in 
specific States have been undertaken. There has, however, been no study of the 
nationwide problems involved. In the light of all this, it seemed to the Finance 
Committee that the best way to secure knowledge of what the problems might 
be was to attack head on and to provide coverage limited to those farmworkers 
who most nearly equate with the types of employment that are now covered. In 
effect, we would have provided a nationwide experiment in farm coverage. This 
we thought was something that could be done. In this we were more venture- 
some than our friends on the House Committee on Ways and Means. Acting 
on the same information that we had, they had dec-ided that even the limited 
coverage we had proposed in committee was not possible. 

In considering farmworker coverage in committee, we had given careful con- 
sideration to the special problems presented by migrant farmworkers. We 
concluded that they should not be covered at this time, and we thought that if 
mgratory farmworker coverage was not provided, the conferees from the Ways 
and Means Committee might be convinced that they should go along with a 
proposal for more limited coverage of farmworkers. 

As it turned out, the measure that we took to conference included coverage for 
migratory workers. The inclusion of that provision made our task in conference 
impossible. However, in the course of the conference, it was also made clear that 
until a thorough study of the whole farmworker coverage problem was made, 
no provision for covering farmworkers could be acceptable to the House. We at 
least were able to get the study started by making specific reference to it in the 
statute. 

In addition to raising these problems, the House conferees were of the opinion 
that the cost of covering farmworkers would be far greater than we estimated, 
and that this would involve tremendous subsidization by other employers to pay 
benefits to farmworkers. They insisted that since they had rejected a farm cov- 
erage amendment in the Ways and Means Committee they were not willing 
to have it thrust on them now as a Senate amendment. And they refused to 
yield to any degree. 

If Senators will look at the good in the conference bill, the improvements that it 
would make in the unemployment program, I am sure that they will vote for 
it. The bill extends coverage to a number of groups who are now without pro- 
tection. It improves the financing of the existing program, and it establishes an 
extended benefits program for periods when unemployment is high. It seems to 
me that these are worthwhile improvements which should not be lost in a dis- 
pute over a questionable extension of coverage. 

But make no mistake about it. If this conference report is not agreed to here 
today, it will not be agreed to in this Congress. It will be a dead bill. There is 
virtually no chance that we could get another conference with the House of 
Representatives. They let a bill comparable to this one die in 1966 becat:ise 
they did not like the Senate amendment. 

I would like to have prevailed on the farm coverage amendment — I voted for 
it in committee. But even without it, I believe this is a good bill. With unem- 
ployment continuing to rise, it is more important than ever that we get the ex- 
tended benefits program enacted into law nosv ^o it will not be necessary to pass 
emergency legislation later on. But that is not all the bill does. It also provides 
coverage of the unemployment comi^ensation program for an additional 4.7 mil- 
lion people who had not previously been protected, and improves the financial 
structure of the system. These three factors make this a good bill — one that 
should be enacted. 

I have already noted that there has been no nationwide study of the prob- 
lems involved in extending unemployment insurance to farmworkers. How- 
ever, an important regional study of the issue is getting underway at the Uni- 
versity of Connecticut. This study will cover the northeastern region of the 
United States consisting of Maine. New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, 
Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, 
Maryland, West Virginia, and Ohio. In the course of the survey farm oijerators, 
farm employees, crew leaders, and migrant workers will be interviewed to find 
out what kind of records employers keep and how much individual employees 
earn, work and are unemployed. The information is to be collected in such a way 
that it should be possible to determine whether farm operators keep, or can 
keep, the kind of records needed for unemployment insurance ; the amount of 
unemployment taxes that would have been collected had farmworkers been 



5028 

covered and how much in benefits would have been paid to unemployed farm- 
workers, both because of their farmwork and because of any other work that is 
covered under present law. 

While the survey will not cover the entire country, the area selected for the 
study should sive a fair representation of the problems that might be eucoun- 
tere<l throughout the rest of the country. The arej\ selected for study has a 
resident farmworker population and is the northern part of the eastern seaboard 
route followed by about 50,000 migratory farmworkers. In addition several 
thousand farmworkers from I'uerto Rico work in the region and many resident 
farmworkers work in more than one State. Thus, the area is broadly representa- 
tive of the national farm population and problems in this area should reflect those 
that would be found throughout the entire cou;itry. 

I would exi)ect that the results of this study would be of a great deal of help 
to us in de.-igning a workable program for covering farmworkers. We have been 
in touch with the people who are running the study and they tell us that they are 
generally keeping to their original schedule and that we should begin to get early 
results of the study around the end of this year. If we wait until this study has 
been completed before taking action on coverage of farmworkers, we should be 
in a better po.-ition to make tound decisions on how coverage should be extended 
to farmworkers. 

Before concluding my remarks, let me advise the Senate that this farm 
coverage amendment is not essential to provide unemployment insurance protec- 
tion for farmworkers. By no means, States are perfectly free to go beyond the 
Federal law and provide coverage for groups which may not be covered. Many 
have done so in various respects. So far as agricultural workers are concerned, a 
few States have extended coverage in limited situations. I urge other States to 
review their own programs and sympathetically consider amendments to cover 
farmworkers on a broad a basis as they reasonably can and to do .^o as swiftly 
as they see fit. I urge them not to wait for a Federal mandate. 

Mr. President, this concludes my explanation of the Senate amendments to 
H.R. 14705. 



Mr. Holland. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. Long. I yield to the Senator from Florida. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, I could not be here in the beginning of this dis- 
cussion today. Did the Senator deal with the amendment which the Senate added 
on the floor attempting to make the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, applicable 
to certain groups of agricultural labor? 

Mr. Long. Yes, I did discuss that matter. The House was rather adamant on 
that provision. Since they had considered it and rejectetl it, they were un- 
willing to accept it as a Senate amendment. 

Tlie best we could get from them was an agreement on a study that would go 
forward as another provision in the bill. It will be a matter of priority and we 
will consider farm coverage again after the study is finished. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, does the Senator mean in this session? 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, I cannot a.ssure the Senator that it will be con- 
sidered again in this' session. However, any Senator has a right on a future bill, 
as the Senator knows, to rai.se the matter again. 

I am frank to say that the House conferees were very firm on this matter. I 
hardly believe that they will agree to the matter before the study is finished. 

'Mr. Holland. Mr. President, as I understand the situation, the existing law 
will continue. Under the existing law, agricultural labor is exempted from 
coverage under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act. 

Mr. IjOng. That is entirely correct. May I say that I, of course, like to see 
the Senate position prevail, and I voted for farm coverage in the committee 
and I voted for the bill. 

Also, I believe we should keep in mind that the conference report we have 
here extends coverage to more people than either the Senate or House bill. 
To that extent, the bill makes a major contribution so that 20 times as many 
people will be covered under this bill as would have been affected by the farm 
coverage provision of the bill. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, the inclusion of any agricultural labor does not 
appear in the conference bill. 

'Mr. Long. No ; it does not. The House conferees were very firm on that 
matter. However, as I say, this bill does provide extended coverage to all un- 



5029 

employed workers covered by unemployment insurance. It provides for up to 
13 weeks of additional benefits and adds 4.7 million jobs to those covered under 
the program. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, I congratulate the Senator from Louisiana on 
the outcome of his conference. Frankly, I had felt that the provisions of the 
Senate bill as applicable to agricultural labor would require further study. 1 
am rather glad that they were eliminated from the bill. 

I do congratulate my friend, the Senator from Louisiana, on having gained 
so many other ixtints and in having made such a clear report on the conference. 

Mr. LoxG. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. 

Mr. President, in that connection, I ask uanimous consent to have printed 
in the Record a tabulation showing the additional jobs to which coverage is ex- 
tended. I believe that it makes a very impressive list There would be 4,753,000 
additional jobs covered as a result of this legislation. 

There being no objection, the tabulation was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows : 

JOBS ADDED TO UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COVERAGE BY CONFERENCE VERSION OF H.R. 14705-MAY 5, 1970 



Category 



FUTA 



State 



Firms with 1 worker in 20 weeks or $1,500 quarterly payroll 

Broader definition of "employee" 

Narrower definition of "agricultural labor" 

U.S. citizen employed by U.S. employers abroad 

Nonprofit organizations 

State hospitals and institutions of higher education .-. 

Total. 



2,302,000 


1,132,000 


360, 000 


210, 000 


205, 000 


190, 000 


160, 000 


160, 000 





2,121,000 





940, 000 



3, 027, 000 



4, 753, 000 



EMPLOYERS ADDED TO UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COVERAGE BY CONFERENCE VERSION OF H.R. 14705 



Firms with 1 worker in 20 weeks or $1,500 quarterly payroll 

Broader definition of "employee" 

Narrower definition of "agricultural labor" 

U.S. citizen employed by U.S. employer abroad.. 

Nonprofit organizations 

State hospitals and institutions of higher education 

Total 



999, 000 


490, 000 


(') 


0) 


(0 


(2) 


(') 


(') 




18, 000 





1,000 



999, 000 



509, 000 



1 Employers already covered. 

2 Not available. 



Mr. Williams of Delaware. Mr. President, the conference report on H.R. 
14705, the Employment Security amendments of 1970, is the best unemployment 
compensation bill that the House of Repre.<entatives and the Senate have been 
able to agree on after 4 years of disagreement. It contains most of the recom- 
mendations made by the present admini.stration and no provisions which they 
object to. Work on the current bill started in the House la.«t October and in the 
Senate last March. In this period we were able to overcome the differences which 
prevented enactment of another unemployment comiiensation bill in 1966 as well 
as to iron out the differences which occurred in the course of writing the present 
legislation. 

A number of the differences between the unemployment compensation bills 
passed by the House and by the Senate were merely technical. There were how- 
ever, two major differences which I think are worth talking about. One of these 
is the provision of the House-passed bill which would have extended imemploy- 
ment compensation to employees of small firms and the other is the provi-sion 
of the Senate-passed bill which would have extended coverage to people working 
on large farms. 

With regard to the small firm provision tlie House passed bill would have ex- 
tended coverage to firms which employed one or more people in 20 weeks a year 
or which had payrolls of $800 or more in a quarter. Under the present law, cov- 
erage is mandatory only for employers of 4 or more people in 20 weeks. This pro- 
vision was not in the Senate bill and in the conference the will of the House pre- 
vailed and the Senate conferees agreed to delete the provision with an amend- 
ment increasing the alternate coverage test from $800 a quarter to $1,500 a 
quarter. 



5030 

On the other hand, the provision relating to employees of large farms was 
a Senate provision which we could not get the House to agree to. Quite honestly, 
I can understand why the House did not go along with the Senate farm coverage 
provision. Adoption of the provision in the Committee on Finance was a close 
thing because we had grave doubts that the provision could be administered. We 
were sympathetic to the problems of farm employees and farm emi>loyers but we 
thought we would not be doing either of them any favor if we provided them with 
an unworkable system of unemployment insurance. Accordingly, there was a 
great deal of .sentiment in favor of instructing the Department of Labor to make 
an in depth study of the problems and the costs involved and to report their rec- 
ommenations to us, as the conference report requires. 

My reservations about this provision were strengthened when the Senate 
adopted an amendment which would have extended farm coverage to migrant 
workers. When the problem was considered in committee, migrant farmworkers 
were thought to present a special problem for which there was no clear solution. 

The majority of the members of tlie committee who were in favor of some 
sort of farm coverage recognized this problem and agreed to exclude migrant 
workers from coverage. We did not know how the coverage of migrant workers 
could be administered and the administration could not tell us how it would 
be administered. Therefore, in committee we thought that experience with a 
limited provisions might provides clues for broader farm coverage at later time. 

When the migrant farm workers amendment was before the Senate I did 
not argue against it on its merits — I thought a good argument could be made 
as to its merits. I had to oppo.se it because it was a problem to which we had no 
.solution. We had no solution in the conference and we have none now. 

We did, however, take the Senate passed provision to conference where we 
were met with very firm resistance. Had we not receded on this point, we could 
not have reached agreement on any bill. And, the action in the Hou.se the other 
day, where the motion to add the Senate pa.ssed provision to the bill failed by a 
vote of 219 to 270, shows that the House conferees represented the will of the 
majority of that body. 

The House has rejected the farm coverage amendment and their conferees 
have been discharged. If we were to readopt the provision at this time, the un- 
employment compensation bill would be dead for this Congress. 

I think we would not be wise to kill this bill. Senators will recall that in 1966 
an unempoyment compensation bill failed enactment when the House and Senate 
were unable to agree on what the provisions should be. 

The bill before us represents pretty much what was not in dispute in 1966. 
We should look at the good which the bill would do. I believe that it is a good 
bill. It would extend coverage to about 4.7 million iieople who do not now have 
coverage, it improves the financing of the present program and it creates a pro- 
gram for paying additional benefits when unemployment is high. This new ex- 
tended benefits program alone might be reason enough to enact the bill now. 
There are soft six)ts in our economy and unemployment is rising. In the past 
when unemployment was high we had to create ad hoc extended benefits programs 
and they did not get into operation early enough to get the most out of them. Now 
we have an opportunity to create a permanent program in advance of high unem- 
ployment. Hopefully the program will get little use but the fact is that in at least 
one State unemployment is now high enough so that extended benefits could be 
paid. 

Thi.s is our last chance in this Congress to get an unemployment compen.sation 
bill passed. The provisions are all a part of the President's legislative program. 
They are good provisions, they are needed provisions. I hope that we will adopt 
this conference report. 

Mr. MoNDALK. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the conference report on H.R. 
14705. the Employiient Security Amendments of 1970 

As chairman of the Migratorv Labor Subcommittee, I am plea.=ed that Senator 
Saxbe. ranking minority member of the subcommittee, as well as nio.st other 
memb'^rs of the .subcommittee, and mther colleagues have joined in r(Hiuesting 
that the Senate vote against the conference report on H.R. 14705, a bill which 
extends coverage and improves benefits for some workers under the unemploy- 
ment compensation sy.stem. 

We do this not because we are opposed to the provisions in the bin. In fact, we 
supnort them in these times of economic insecurity and r'sing unemx)loyment. 

We urge rejection of the conference report because we think that the provi- 
sions adopted by the Senate extending coverage of unemployment compensa- 



5031 

tion to farm employers who have eight or more employees in each of 26 weeks 
during the year should not have been abandoned in conference. 

We think it was most unfortunate that farmworker coverage was dropped 
in conference. The farmworker coverage adopted by the Senate was a very 
modest beginning. In fact, only 2 percent of all farm employers — approximately 
22,000 — and 20 percent of all farm employees — approximately 250,000 — would 
be affected by this provision. Relatively few and only the larger agriculture 
businesses would be covered, and not the small family farmer. This does not go 
as far as the administration proposal which called for coverage of farm em- 
ployers who have four or more employees in each of 20 different weeks during 
the year. 

The great majority of the working force is covered by unemployment com- 
pensation — over 80 percent of all job.s. Coverage of farmworkers is entirely 
feasible according to existing studies. Recordkeeping presents no new obstacle, 
as the agribusinesses involved are already covered under other Federal and 
State laws requiring records. There is no justification for failing to include farm- 
workers under the coverage of unemployment compensation. 

We therefore urge rejection of the conference report. If successful, w^e will 
request that a new" conference be convened and that the Senate conferees insist 
on the farmworker provisions adopted by the Senate. 

I think in many respects the report is sound, and in many respects excellent 
in terms of extending coverage and expanding benefits. It incorporates principles 
with which I wholeheartedly agree. 

But tragically, and once again, adopting this report we will be repeating what 
is virtually an ancient and tragic mistake of completely forgetting about the 
migrant and seasonal farmworkers in America for they have been excluded 
from coverage. And this omission is despite the fact that the Senate, after sub- 
stantial and heated debate last April 7, 1970, voted to take the first step in the 
right direction by including the large corporate farms and the migrant and 
seasonal farmworkers who are ejiiployed on those large farms under this unem- 
ployment compensation program. 

In our effort to oppose the conference report and send it back with instructions 
to the conferees to include farmworkers, I am joined by the distinguished Sena- 
tor from Ohio (Mr. Saxbe), who is the ranking minority member of the Sub- 
committee on Migratory Labor, the distinguished junior Senator from Penn- 
sylvania (Mr. Schweiker), who is also a member of the Subcommittee on Migra- 
tory Labor, and also the distinguished Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Williams), 
who is Chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor, the senior Senator from New 
York (Mr. Javits), who is the ranking minority member of the full Committee 
on Labor and Public Welfare, and I believe there will be others who will publicly 
wish to join in this effort. 

I think I speak for all of them when I say we deeply regret the necessity for 
this effort to reject the conference report, but we see once again the neglect of 
the most desperately iX)or in American life, who probably work as hard and 
earn as little for their efforts as any people in America. These are the migrant 
and seasonal farmworkers who are the most desperately poor by practically 
any standard, including income, health, nutrition, hou.«ing, education, and the 
right to enjoy the political, economic, and social benefits attendant with living 
in a given geographical area. These people have been chronicled time after time 
in some of the great literature on American life, beginning with reports as 
early as 1901. They have been graphically portrayed in novels such as "Grapes 
of Wrath." 

Again their plight was discussed by the Toland committee in the 1940's in the 
House of Representatives, then again, they are portrayed in a 1951 report in 
the Truman administration. Moving television documentaries, beginning with 
"Harvest of Shame" by Edward R. Murrow, and 2 years ago on educational 
television in "What Har^^est for the Reaper" on migrants in the State of New 
York. Again, a few weeks ago in an NBC documentary "Migrant — An NBC White 
Paper." 

Then a few days ago in a report by a team of noted doctors who had 
examined the heath conditions of migrant farmworkers in Texas and Florida 
under the auspices of the Field Foundation, which described conditions that 
are beyond belief. 

And all we are proposing to do here is to take the first step to include the 
farmworker within the unemployment compensation laws of this country, and to 



5032 

include only a small proportion, affecting less than 20 percent of farm lahor and 
2 percent of our farms — the large corporate growers, to be sure. 

Mr. Javits. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. MoNDALE. I yield. 

Mr. jAvrrs. Of course. I join, as the Senator said just a few minutes ago, witli 
him and other Senators, but the Senator mentioned percentage figures, and I am 
sure he will agree that the i)ercentages shou d relate to the actual numbered 
figures. As I understand it, 2 percent of the farm employers represents 23,000 
employers and 20 percent of the farmworkers represents 276.000 workers. 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a study made by the Department 
of Labor may be utilized in this respect by being printed in the Record at the 
conclusion of my remarks. 

The Presiding Officer. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

(See exhibit 1.) 

Mr. Javits. Mr. President, the unemployment insurance conference report be- 
fore the Senate today discards one of the most important features of the Senate 
bill — namely, the coverage of agricultural employees — and the Senate must not 
perpetuate 30 years of injustice to and discrimination against this class of our 
Nation's labor force by adopting this report. 

For years the Nation's agricultural workers have been the victims of this in- 
vidious discrimination. Only recently, in 1966, were they brought under the Fair 
Labor Standards Act and only in li)50 were they brought under social security. 

President Nixon in his message to the Congress of July 8, 1969, recommended 
limited coverage for agricultural workers and Secretary of Labor Shultz vigor- 
ously supiwrted coverage of employers having four workers in 20 weeks. The 
administration thus sought to cover "agricultural businesses" — those large farms 
employing more than four workers in 20 weeks, in which it was felt that the em- 
ployment situation was at least as stable as in comparable industries. 

Unfortunately the House Ways and Means Committee narrowly defeated a pro- 
posal to cover agricultural employers employing eight or more workers in 26 
weeks, and the House bill provided no coverage for agricultural workers. 

The Senate Finance Committee bill did, however, provide coverage to farm- 
workers where an employer had eight or more workers in 26 weeks. As the com- 
mittee report stated on page 12 : 

"By limiting coverage to agricultural businesses the Committee believes that 
the cost of extension of coverage will be reasonable and comparable to cost rates 
of some currently covered industries." 

The Senate bill would provide coverage for 2 percent of the farm employers — 
23,000 — having 22 percent of the total farm work force — 276,000 — and repre- 
sented a first step in removing this great injustice to a particular class of our Na- 
tion's labor force. I am greatly concerned that this Nation spends $3.7 billion per 
year in farm subsidies for 2.5 million recipients. It is inconceivable that over 
13,000 recipients are paid subsidies greater than ,$20,000 a year and yet these 
same large agricultural businesses do not provide the most basic protection to 
their employees in the form of unemployment insurance. In terms of farm em- 
ployers only, 2 percent of all farm employers would have been covered by the 
Senate bill. 

Mr. President, the will of the Senate was clearly expressed when, by a record 
vote of 42 to 36, the Senate adopted an amendment offered by the Senator from 
Minnesota (Mr. Mondale) and cosponsored by the Senator from California (Mr. 
Murphy) that strengthened the amendments made in the Finance Committee 
bill. The Senate Finance Committee, in redefining the term "farm employer" used 
in the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, excluded from that definition the term 
"crew leaders" and their employees. Thus, the committee exempted from unem- 
ployment insurance coverage those agricultural workers who, by virtue of their 
employer's having eight workers in 26 weeks, would have been covered had they 
not been working for a "crew leader." The Mondale-Murphy amendment was a 
modest one and did not extend coverage for agricultural labor beyond that which 
was intended by the committee bill. The amendment simply recognized and al- 
leviated a potential for abuse by removing the temptation on the part of many 
employers to appoint a "crew leader" and thereby exempt themselves from the 
unemployment insurance tax, although they ordinarily would be covered if they 
employed eight workers in 26 weeks. 

The conference committee did not support the Senate position and the confer- 
ence report, filed May 5, 1970, contains no coverage whatsoever for agricultural 
labor. 



5033 

Mr. President, there is no question but that some coverage under the unem- 
ployment insurance laws sliould be extended to farmworkers. Such studies that 
are available indicate that the benefit cost ratio — benefits as a percent of taxable 
payroll — for coverage of employees of large agricultural operations would be 
no more costly than is coverage of other industries. 

The benefit-cost rate for calendar year 1967 in California for the canning/proc- 
essing industry was 10 percent and the rate for contract construction was 3.3 
percent. Based upon Labor Department statistics ana a si>ecial survey conducted 
in California in 19(50, the benefit cost rate for agriculture is 9.5 percent. Under 
California's elective coverage law, as of December 31, 1968, 765 employers with 
approximately 18,000 employees had elected coverage and the benefit cost rates 
for agriculture under elective coverage in 1967 and 1968 were 5.3 and 4.5 percent 
respectively. 

The North Dakota experience involving elective coverage shows similar results 
with the benefit cost rate comparable to that in other industries. Although the 
survey was a limited one, four employers with an annual taxable payroll of 
$10,000 or more had a benefit cost rate of 3.6 percent and the one employer under 
the North Dakota elective coverage law having eight or more workers in 26 weeks 
had a 1968 benefit cost rate of 1.7 i>ercent. 

In a Connecticut study based upon a special 1960 survey it was estimated 
that the benefit cost rate for agriculture would be 1 percent as computed with an 
all industry benefit cost rate of 2.5 percent. 

Mandatory coverage for agricultural employers who employed 20 or more 
workers in 20 weeks was instituted in Hawaii in 1959. In 1968, 35 employers with 
average month y employment of 9,815 were covered under the self-financed pro- 
gram — employers pay only for benefits paid which are chargeable to him, rather 
than contributing to the regular unemployment insurance program — and the 
benefit cost rate was 1.1 percent. In 1967 the benefit cost rate was a:So 1.1 percent 
for these agricultural employers while the benefit cost rate for private industry 
in Hawaii was 1.6 percent. 

Finally, Mr. President, the Canadian experience where agricultural coverage 
is mandatory, for the fiscal years 1967 through 1969 shows a benefit cost ratio of 
1.2 percent for agricu tural coverage while the ratio during the same period for 
construction was 2 percent. The Canadian program covers 35,000 employers and 
has added 62,000 to the insured work force. 

Mr. President, as the chairman of our Finance Committee indicated, this bill 
represents a long overdue step in reforming the iinemployment insurance system. 
The recent Labor Department unemployment figures and the minority report of 
the Joint Economic Committee underscore my deep concern for this vital legisla- 
tion. I strongly support this legislation but I feel that it is inexcusable to provide 
the reforms in this bill to the majority of the Nation's labor force at the expense 
of our country's agricultural workers. This is particularly true when the Confer- 
ence Committee could report back a bill within a matter of hours containing 
limited coverage for agricultural workers. 

Exhibit 1 
statement on coverage of large farm employers 

While employees in the agricultural industry should be covered under the 
same provisions as all other employees, a provision to extend coverage only to 
large farm employers, including farm labor contractors (crew leaders), is pro- 
posed as an initial step. 

By beginning coverage in the agricultural sector with large farm employers, 
the same gradual approach that was used in the nonagricultural sector would be 
app'ied. Available information indicates that it would be feasible to start with 
coverage on the same basis as the present FUTA provision, i.e. employers of 4 or 
more workers in 20 weeks. Such a provision would affect about 5 percent of all 
employers of agricultural labor but 30 percent of all the employment under State 
unemnloyment insurance laws. 

H.R. 14705 includes no provision for tlie extension of coverage to employees in 
agriculture. The House Ways and Means Committee did consider defining a large 
farm employer as one who employed 8 or more workers in 26 weeks. This provi- 
sion, while more restrictive than the 4 or more workers in 20 weeks provision, 
wouM. nevertheless, follow the same gradual approach used in the non-agricul- 
tural sector. Such a provision would extend coverage to only about 2 i)ercent of all 



5034 

farm employers and about 20 percent of all the employment under State unem- 
ployment insurance laws. 

Many persons are employed in both the agricultural and non-agricultural sec- 
tors of the work force. In the iwst ten years over 30% of all hired workers on 
farms earned part of their wages in non-farm work. 

NUMBER OF PERSONS WHO DID ANY FARM WAGE WORK DURING THE YEAR, 1947-68 
[Persons 14 years of age and over] 



Number 



Percent 



Year 



Total 


Farmwork 
only 


Farm and 

nonfarm 

work 


Total 


Farmwork 
only 


Farm and 

nonfarm 

work 


3. 394 


1,835 
2,498 
2,886 

(') 
2,410 

(') 

2,1^^ 

(•) 
2,544 
2,947 
2,918 
2,421 
2,368 
2,356 
2,342 
2,450 
2,094 
1,983 
1,685 
2,017 
1,852 


1,569 
1,254 
1,254 

(') 
864 

(') 

(') 
864 

(') 
1,031 
1,015 
1,294 
1,156 
1,325 
1,132 
1,280 
1,147 
1,276 
1,145 
1,078 
1,061 
1,067 


100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
(') 
100 

100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 


54 
67 
70 

8 

i'i 

5'i 

74 
69 
68 
64 
67 
65 
68 
62 
63 
61 
66 
63 


46 


3,752 


33 


4, 140 


30 


4, 342 


(') 


3, 274 


26 


2,980 


(') 


0) 


(') 


3,009 


29 


(') 


(') 


3, 575 


2§ 


3, 962 


26 


4,212 


31 


3, 577 


32 


3, 693 


36 


3, 488 


33 


3,622 


35 


3, 597 


32 


3, 370 


38 


3,128 


37 


2, 763 


39 


3, 078 


34 


2.919 


37 



1947 
1948 
1949 
1950 
1951 
1952 
1953 
1954 
1955 
1956 
1957 
1958. 
1959 
1960 
1961 
1962 
1963 
1964 
1965 
1966 
1967 
1968 



I Information not available. 

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hired Farm Working Force, 1947-68, Sept. 16, 1969. 

BENEFIT COST RATES AND AVERAGE TAX RATES FOR SELECTED INDUSTRIES BY STATE (SELECTED YEARS) 



State 



Benefit 
cost rate > 
all Indus- 
tries 


Average tax rate ^ 




Estimated 

benefit 

cost rate 3 

agriculture 


Con- 
struction 


Manufac- 
Services turing 


1.3 
2.4 
2.5 
.9 
2.8 


1.9 
3.5 
2.4 
2.2 
2.8 


1.5 
3.0 
1.9 
.9 
2.2 


1.4 
2.8 
2.1 
1.1 
2.4 


3.8 
«9.5 
1.5 
1.6 
3.3 



Arizona 

California... 
Connecticut. 
Nebraska... 
New York... 



1 Benefits paid as a percentof taxable wages. For Arizona, Connecticut, Nebraska, and New York: 1959; California: 1967. 

2 Benefit cost rates not available tor ttiese industries in all States listed. Average tax rates are only indicative of long 
range average costs. Consequently, in any given year tfie tax rate may be higher or lower than the cost rate for that year. 
Rates shown are for 1961 for Arizona, Connecticut, Nebraska, and New York and for 1967 for California. 

3 Based on special surveys conducted in the States shown. Arizona, 1959; California, 1965-66; Connecticut, Nebraska, 
and New York, 1960. Estimated cost rates are for a 12-month period prior to the survey date in Arizona, Connecticut, 
Nebraska, and New York and for calendar year 1967 for California. 

* Benefit cost rates for selected industries for calendar year 1967 are: canning and preserving fruits, vegetables, and 
seafoods, 10 percent; contract construction, 8.3 percent. 



5035 

FARMWORKERS,! NUMBER OF FARM EMPLOYERS: SELECTED YEARS 



1,890 


1,600 


1,900 


1,610 


1,940 


1,630 


1,945 


1,625 


1,950 


1,620 


1,960 


1,620 


100 


85 


100 


85 


100 


84 


100 


83 


100 


83 


100 


82 



2 


3 or more 


215 


70 


220 


70 


230 


75 


225 


95 


230 


100 


235 


105 


11 


4 


12 


3 


12 


4 


12 


5 


12 


5 


12 


5 



Workers with stated number of farm employers 
Item Total 1 

Number of workers (in thousands): 

1955 - 

1960 

1961 

1962.. 

1963.. - - __.. 

1964 _-__ 

Percent of workers: 

1955.. _ _.- 

1960 _. 

1961 .- 

1962 

1963 

1964 

I Over 80 percent of all agricultural employees work for only 1 employer. 

Source: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Social Security Administration, Social Security Farm Statistics 

EXPERIENCE WITH COVERED EMPLOYMENT IN AGRICULTURE 

The research studies summarized on page 23 were based on State surveys of 
farm workers and employers designed to measure the feasibility and cost of 
covering all farm employers. Other indicators of the cost of farm worker cover- 
age are available, derived from actual experience. The statement covers the 
experience of Canada and Hawaii where the coverage is mandatory and of Cali- 
fornia and North Dakota where farm employers have elected coverage. 

CANADA 

Fiscal year « 



Apr. 1- 
Item 1967-68 1968-69 Aug. 31, 1969 



Contributions. 

Benefits paid _ 

Benefits divided by contributions. 


$2,097,560 

1,940,471 

0.9 


$2, 339, 500 

3, 467, 444 

1.5 


$994,487 

1,121,171 

1.1 









I The Canadian fiscal year is Apr. 1 through Mar. 31. 

For the total period the ratio of benefits to contributions is 1.2 (for the same 
period there was a 4.4 ratio for forestry and fishing and 2.0 for construction). 

Unlike the proposals that have been considered in the United States, Canadian 
farm worker coverage is subject to no size-of-firm exclusion. Employment is 
not insurable if performed for a designated relative or if cash wages are 
less than $9 a week or if the employee or employer's spouse is self-employed in 
agriculture. Wages paid for the first 24 days of a temporary Avorker's employ- 
ment are excluded from taxation and in any case a temporary worker's wages 
are taxable only if he has earned at least $250. The program, established March 
1, 1967, covers 35,000 employers and has added 62,000 to the insured work force. 
Reported experience indicates that employer records are adequate and con- 
tribution delinquency is 10 percent below the average for other employers. 



In 1959 mandatory coverage was instituted for agricultural employers who 
employed 20 workers in 20 weeks. An employed may elect to contribute under the 
regular unemployment insurance program or may elect to pay only for the 
benefits paid which are chargeable to him (self-financed). The majority of all 
employers and employment is covered under the self-financed progr'am. In 1968, 
35 employers with average monthly employment of 9,815 were covered under the 
self-financed program and 12 employers with average monthly employment of 
1,106 were covered under the regular program. Benefit costs are not available 
for employers under the regular program. However, the benefit cost rate (benefits 
as a percent of taxable payroll) for self -financed agriculture for 19M-1968 is as 
follows : 



5036 

HAWAII 



Year 




Self-financed 
agriculture 


Private 
industry 


1964 




1.0 


1.6 


1965 




1.0 


1.3 


1966 




1.0 


1.3 


19S7 




1.1 


1.6 


1968 




1.1 


(') 










1 Not available. 


NORTH DAK:>TA 







The following data reflect elective coverage of agricultural employment in 
North Dakota. 

Number of employing units 120 

Average employment 148 

Unemployment rate ^ 13. 2 

Taxable wages (thousands) $377.3 

Ck)ntributions $23, 560 

Percent of taxable wages 6.3 

Benefits charges (thousands) 46.9 

Percent of taxable wages 12. 4 

Average weekly benefit amounts ^$34.79 

Average weeks of benefits ^ 14. 9 

Percent of beneficiaries exhausting benefits ^26.0 

1 Workers earning largest portion of their wage credits in agricultural employment. 

A distribution by annual taxable payroll shows that employers with relatively 
large annual payrolls have relatively low co.st rates. For example, 9 employers 
had an annual taxable payroll of under $500 and a co.st rate of 66.6 percent while 
4 employers with an annual taxable payroll of $10,000 or more had a cost rate of 
3.6 percent. Only one of the employers electing coverge in North Dakota h"d 8 
or more workers in 26 weeks. This employer had a benefit cost rate in 1968 of 1.7 
percent. 

CALIFORNIA 

As of December 31. 1968. 765 employers with approximately 18,000 employees 
had elected coverage under the provisions of the California law. The following 
is a distribution of the type of agricultural service or operation in which these 
employees worked. 

CALIFORNIA 

Aporoximafe 

Number of number of 

Type of service or operation employers employees 

Overall farming operations 

Land leveling 

Planting, raising, and fiarvesting 

Nurseries 

Crop dusting and fertilizing 

Grain and seed cleaning 

Hay baling 

Irrigation— water companies, etc 

Field packing 

Roadsiding 

Livestock and dairying 

Mink raising. 

Poultry raising 

Poultry hatcfiing 

Packing shed 

Dehydrating 

Truckdrivers 

Sheeoshearing.. 

Specialized services 

Total, approved applications covering agricultural labor 765 18,284 



90 


3,900 


65 


372 


36 


462 


27 


183 


57 


640 


2 


5 


17 


64 


102 


1,046 


4 


137 


21 


88 


50 


413 


1 


1 


11 


65 


6 


47 


139 


7,753 


3 


106 


92 


1,592 


24 


297 


18 


1,156 



5037 

EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE COVERAGE PROVISIONS FOR WORKERS IN AGRICULTURE UNDER THE FEDERAL 

UNEMPLOYMENT TAX ACT 



Size of firm 



Estimated 
number of 

employers, Percent of al 
1968 employers' 



Estimated 

annual 

average 

employment 

1968 



Percent of all 
employment' 



1 or more at any time 1,300,000 

4 or more in 20 weeks 65,000 

8 or more in 2C weeks 25,000 

8 or more in 26 weeks 23,000 



100 
5 
2 
2 



1,281,000 
425, 000 
296, 000 
276,000 



100 
33 
23 
22 



' Rounded to nearest percent. 

Source: United States Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wage and Hour and Public Contracts Divisions, 
and the Unemployment Insurance Service. 

The benefit cost rates for agriculture under elective coverage in 1967 and 
1968 were, 5.3 and 4.5 percent respectively. 

Other pertinent data of high cost industries in California show the following: 



Industry 



Average Benefits 

covered paid per Benefit- 

employment covered Job cost rate 



Contract construction .-- 274,971 

Packing, processing, sorting, grading, assembling, preserving and 
canning of fruits and vegetables (includes canning and preserving of 

seafoods) - 76,955 

Total, all industries 4,839,950 



$436 



422 
95 



8.3 



10.8 
2.4 



Mr. MoNDALE. If I may interrupt there, it is the opinion of the counsel of the 
Migratory Labor Subcommittee that the number of employees estimated to be 
covered is actually inflated, becau-e the fact is that the statistics are so loose 
and vague that the employees are not even accurately counted, and that the tests 
for coverage, almost by definition, will eliminate many. Thus, in addition to the 
eight employees for 26 weeks test for the farmer, each employee must meet State 
eligibility standards for experience in the work force, a test which may be par- 
ticularly difiicult for migrant and seasonal farmworkers to meet. 

Mr. Javits. Is it not a fact that what we have tried to do, and what we will 
try to do by rejecting the conference report — and I shall vote against it — is to do 
what has been done in North Dakota, Connecticut, Hawaii, and Canada, and 
that the cost ratio to benefits as compared to actuarial expenses on the most 
hard-headed level fully bears out the fact that coverage of farmworkers would 
be no more burdensome than is coverage of industrial employees. So there is no 
reason for cutting it out even on the most hard-headed economic terms. 

Mr. MoNDALE. That is correct. That is why Secretary of Labor Shultz sup- 
ported the program as well as many of our colleagues from both parties are in 
favor of it. I am not so sure they are in favor of rejecting the conference report, 
but they are in favor of the principle of extending coverage. 

Mr. Javits. I think when a Senator who may be labeled a conservative joins 
the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Mondale), who may be classified as a liberal, 
that indicates the breadth of the support of this principle. 

The conference report before us involves a very desirable bill. We are all for 
it except for this glaring omission. 

Does the Senator feel, in good conscience — and I feel that way and I think it 
is very important that we make it clear — that if we rejected the conference 
report, for the reasons stated, ju-t as the House often says '•No," as it has in this 
case, the conferees would go back and there would reasonably soon come out of 
conference at least the minimum position of the Senate? 

Mr. Mondale. Yes. I certainly think so. This is a very mod-^st proposal. It is 
about half what the President of the United States requested. The unemployment 
benefits would extend only to farmers having eight workers, for 26 weeks. The 
President's propo>al was for covering farms with four workers for 20 weeks. It is 
clear that only large farms, and not the small family farmer would be affected by 
the Senate-passed amendment. 



36-513 O— 71 — Pt. 8-A- 



5038 

After all. what right do the larger corporations — indeed, I think some of them, 
such as Coca Cola, would agree — to say that their employees should not he cov- 
ered by unemployment compensation? I think they would agree that they should 
he covered. It is far too late in history not to include the major corporate farms 
within the reach of this program. 

I am encouraged into believing that the conferees would agree once the Senate 
confirmed its commitment to farmworker justice. The trouble has been that 
migrants have been considered exix-ndable. They have no economic power. Who 
cares about them? They have no iwlitical i)ower. They are the forgotten Ameri- 
cans. So it is the easiest thing in the world to forget about them, to compromise 
them away, but it is the most tragic situation in America. 

I believe the conferees on the House side are as aware as we are of the situa- 
tion and would help us if they thought we meant business. 

Mr. Javits. I agree with the Senator. It is true that they have no vote, and. as 
the Senator has .>-aid, they have no economic power. The crying need itself has 
really disturbed this country. Millions of i^eople, young and old alike, feel a deep 
grievance in their own consciences, because of what we know is happening to 
these workers. That is why "Grapes of AVrath" and all its progency have had 
such a profound effect on .\merica. That is why, when hearings are held on 
migratory workers — and the Senator from Minnesota has conducted them — there 
are headlines which catch our eyes and our ears. This, and the fact that the 
Senator and other Senators will be voting to turn down a highly expanded pro- 
gram of unemployment compensation, it .seems to me. indicates tliat these i)eople 
do have an impact and that ultimately we will vote to help them. 

Mr. MoM)ALE. I thank the Senator from New York. I yield now to the Senator 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Schweiker). 

Mr. Schweiker. Mr. President. I am pleased to have joined the Senator from 
Minnesota, chairman of the Migratory Labor Subcommittee, the Senator from 
New York, and the Senator from Ohio as a cosponsor of this very important 
amendment. 

As the chairman of the subcommittee has pointed out, it is a very modest be- 
ginning. Unfortunately, when one sits day after day through these hearings on 
the migratory problem, he learns that this modest beginning is a very important 
start as far as thO'--e i>eople are concerned. 

One cannot help but be impressed by two factors which have placed migratory 
workers on the bottom rungs of the ladder of American workers and American 
economic status. I'nfortunately, most of them are not repre-ented in the House 
or in the Senate because of their migratory status. They have no Representa- 
tive in the House or Senator to speak out for them, becau.se hy the time they 
harvest one crop, they are not qualified to vote in the elections because of theii 
migratory or transitory working conditions. So they have one strike against 
them, in that they do not represent a constituency which can appeal to their 
representatives. 

Second, and equally important, our committee made great efforts and great 
strides in agreeing to a few modest proposals, but, unfortunately, there is an 
administrative and enforcement problem, and it is a lot like aiming at that 
proverbial moving target. p]very time we get a law on the books, by the time 
we try to enforce it. the worker is gone, nol)ody is there, everything is forgotten, 
because the administrator is not on the scene to enforce it, as is the case with 
the normal worker, and blow the whistle when employers get off base. By the 
time he gets off base, the worker is in another State, harvesting some other 
crop or food. 

I think that the conscience of America has got to come to grips with this prob- 
lem. I commend the conferees for what they have done on this hiU. T think, with 
the exception we are talking about here, that it is a good bill. They have done a 
lot of work. 

I realize there are differences between the House and the Senate, and I realize 
the other Iwidy would have to take .some action on this prono.sal. P.ut. having 
.served in the House of Rei)re.sentatives, let me say that the vote there was the 
largest, to my knowledge, that the migratory worker has ever received in that 
body. I think at last the House of Representatives is waking up to the fact that 
we all have a responsibility. I believe that vote is close, in terms of anything 
that has been done before, to indicating that that body is aroused about this 
problem. 

So I hope that for once we will look at the problem, not in terms of Avhom we 
represent or who our constituents are — because I think on that basis probably 



5039 

no one should support the proposal of the Senator from Minnesota — ^but I think 
it is important to all of us that, in taking at least this modest step which repre- 
sents only the bottom rung of the ladder, we awaken to our responsibilities and 
support the amendment of the Senator from Minnesota. 

Mr. MoNDALE. I thank the Senator from Pennsylvania. I would like to say 
at this point how much I appreciate the efforts and the conscientious involve- 
ment of the Senator from Pennsylvania in the work of the Subcommittee on Mi- 
gratory Labor, because this is a thankless sort of work, often misunderstood, but 
it is really the only forum in the country before which these poor and disadvan- 
taged people can come to be heard, and it is only because of efforts such as those of 
the Senator from Pennsylvania, that I think there remains some hope that we 
might yet make a change in their living and working conditions. 

I see in the Chamber the distinguished Senator from Ohio ( Mr. Saxbe) , who has 
worked so hard as the ranking minority member of this subcommittee, who sat 
through almost all the hearings and is as familiar as anyone with the nature 
of this problem. 

I am glad to yield to the Senator from Ohio. 

Mr. Saxbe. Mr. President, once again I would like to associate myself with 
the remarks of the Senator from Minnesota, who has chaired this subcommittee 
and heard, day after day, of the exploitation of migratory labor. 

More than the issue of migratory labor is involved, however. I cannot help 
feeling that the House would accept a token if this matter went back to them. 
I do not want to see this provision de.stroyed. As the Senator from Louisiana and 
the Senator from Delaware have pointed out, we do not want to lose these gains 
that have been fought out over the years for the great number of workers who are 
covered in this bill on which we are now in conference. But I believe it is not 
unreasonable to think that we can have a beginning of coverage for some of the 
agricultural worker.^ as well. 

These are not small organizations we are dealing with ; they are big corpora- 
tions. As the Senator from Minnesota has pointed out, the Coca-Cola Corp. and 
others of almost that magnitude are the employers that would be brought under 
this program, and the relatively small number of agricultural workers certainly 
are entitled to be included. 

One of the areas that I was particularly hoi>eful about, if we could go ahead 
with this matter, was that of the crew. If there is one group that is exploited, it 
is the crew, under the crew leader, of which the estimates run that there are as 
many as 100,000 crew leaders, perhap.s, 10,000 of whom would be significant ; but 
here we are trying to cover only 1,000 crew leaders. 

How does the crew system work? The crew leader pulls up on a street corner, 
let us say in Florida, or perhaps in New Jersey, depending on the crop, or in 
Michigan or Ohio, and picks up people off the streets. He takes them out where 
he has a contract with an operator, and they proceed to work, either on a piece- 
work basis, by the pound, by the bushel, or by the box, and then the farm owner 
or operator pays the crew leader and he, in turn, is the one who has the privity 
with the worker that he takes out in the mornings. They like to pay them off every 
night, because it relieves them of responsibility. Yet the individual crew member 
could work .36;") days a year, and have absolutely no coverage and no benefits. 

He is exploited in other ways also. He is charged for the ride out in the bus ; he 
is charged for his lunch ; he is charged, perhaps, for a bottle of wine. They are 
exploited from the time they leave until the time they return. 

I think it is not unrea.sonable to believe that the House would recognize this. 
I believe they want to cover these i>eople. The President, in his message, asked 
that we cover the farm workers of any operator who ha.s hired more than four 
workers for more than 20 weeks. We do not even ask that ; we say eight workers 
for 26 week.s. 

If we could do this, it would be a beginning toward covering an area that has 
long needed attention. I think it would solve t-ome of the miseries. We hear a lot 
about the migration to the cities. We deplore the fact that, as people crowd into 
our inner cities, there is no work, there is only demeaning welfare, tlie problems 
of housing, and all of that. How much better it would be if they could have 
some tyne of unemployment compensation. I am not talking about just migrants, 
I am talking about residents as well. How much better it would be if they had 
some type of unemployment compensation which would hold them in the rural 
areas, where they could survive and search for other employment without being 
forced by economic circumstance into the city, where they create the tremendous. 



5040 

very hostile problems involved in trying to survive in an environment to which 
they have never become adapted. 

So I think that we should reject this report, go back to tlie House of Repre- 
sentatives, and ask that they reconsider their iwsition. I certainly commend 
the Senator from Minnesota for his work pertaining to migrants, and also the 
Senators who sat on the conference committee and salvaged so much that was of 
value. I regret that they were not able to sell this agricultural provision, but I 
believe on a second try they could. 

Mr. MoNDALE. I thank the Senator from Ohio for this very useful observa- 
tions, and, of course, for being the most loyal and hard working member on the 
mo.st frustrating efforts of the Subcommittee on Migratory I^ibor. 

He makes two points that I think are important. In the first place, that the 
farmworkers has been denied for all of the.se years coverage under most of the 
modern social and economic legislation that Congress and enacted into law. 

For example, in 1970, a State employment security agency will pay a worker 
who has become unemployed the 50 billionth dollar in unemployment insurance 
benefits paid .since the system was established in 1963. But no farmworker will 
have received a penny of that $50 billion. 

In 1970 alone, employees will receive more than $2 billion in unemployment 
insurance benefits: but no farm worker will receive a penny of that coverage. 

There are some 58 million workers covei'ed by unemployment insurance today, 
and this conference report will add an additional 4 million, but not a single 
migrant or seasonal farm workers will yet be covered under this legislation. 

We hear the argument that one of the reasons is that we do not know how to 
cover migratory farm workers, and that more research is needed. But I would 
remind the Senate, as did the Senator from Ohio, that the I'resident of the 
United States, Mr. Nixon him.self, urged that Congress adopt a more liberal bill, 
by 50 percent, than tlie one we are talking about now. The administration 
urged coverage of farms that had only four or more workers in 20 weeks, and 
they did not recommend more research. 

In a recent leter from Mr. Arnold Weber, Assistant Secretarj' of Labor, 
dated May 6, 1970, regarding recently contracted research on coverage of all 
employees, he said : 

"The Department of Labor viewed this resarch project as providing informa- 
tion that would be primarily relevant to extending farm coverage beyond that 
which President Nixon had proposed to the Congress in July 1969. The issue 
of large farm coverage was still before the Congress when this project was ap- 
proved. The Department felt that there was sufficient data available from earlier 
studie.s and experience to demonstrate the feasibility of coverage of large fanns, 
and Secretary of Labor Shultz so advised the Senate Committee on Finance in 
his testimony on February 5, 1970." 

In other words, the Secretary of Labor certifies, in this letter, that in his 
judgment — and his is the Department which must handle this legi.slation — that 
they are fully convinced that it is feasible, proper, and wise to proceed with this 
minimal unemployment compensation coverage proposal. 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the letter from Mr. Weber 
printed at this point in the Record. 

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Record, 
as follows : 

U.S. Department of Labor, 
Washington, D.C., May 6, 1970. 
Hon. Walter F. Mondale, 
Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, 
U.S. Sen<itc, Washington, D.C. 

Dear Mr. Chairman : Mr. Boren Chertkov, Counsel for the Subcommittee on 
Migratory Labor, asked that we provide you with information on a research 
project which the Department of Labor has fiuided, and the relationship of 
that project to the proi)osed unemployment insurance coverage of farm workers 
which was contained in the Senate version of II.R. 14705 and which was supported 
by the Administration. 

The title of the research project is "The Impact of Extending TTnemployment 
Insurance to Agricultural Workers in the Northeastern States." The study is 
being conducted cooperatively by agricultural economists from Agricultural 
Experiment Stations in 13 Northeastern States. The total cost of the project is 
.$1,725,000, of which the Agricultural Experiment Stations will contribute $730,- 
000 and the U.S. Department of Labor .$989,000. 



5041 

The project proposal was formally submitted to the Department of Labor on 
January 13, 1970, by the XE-58 Technical Committee of the Association of North- 
east Agricultural Experiment Station Directors. The project was approved by the 
Department on February 11, 1970. 

A sample of farm employers in the 13 States are being surveyed by mail to 
obtain data on their farm employment and payroll, their farm operations and 
other data related to the employment practices on their farms. A sample of 
workers on these farms will be personally interviewed to obtain data on house- 
hold characteristics, a detailed one year employment history, and other infor- 
mation pertaining to labor force behavior and participation in unemployment 
compensation programs. 

The Department of Labor viewed this research project as providing informa- 
tion that would be primarily relevant to extending farm coverage beyond that 
which President Xixon had proposed to the Congress in July 1969. The issue 
of large farm coverage was still before the Congress when this project was ap- 
proved. The Department felt that there was sufficient data available from earlier 
studies and experience to demonstrate the feasibility of coverage of large farms, 
and Secretary of Labor Shultz so advised the Senate Committee on Finance in 
his testimony on February 5, 1970. 

Farms in the Northeast are generally smaller, and few of them would have 
been affected by the large farm coverage proposals. Thus, the Department felt 
that the Northeast is a ideal area to study the feasibility of covering middle 
and smaller size farms and interstate farm workers. We also felt that the infor- 
mation that was developed would help us in preparing for the administration 
of benefit payments to farm workers, especially interstate workers, if coverage of 
large farm employers were enacted. (The coverage provisions of H.R. 14705 do not 
become effective until January 1, 1972.) 

I appreciate your interest in this study. We will be happy to furnish you with 
more detailed information. 
Sincerely, 

Arnold R. Weber, 
Assistant Secretary for Manpoicer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? 

Mr. Mondale. I am glad to yield to the Senator from Massachusetts. 

Mr. Kennedy. I want to indicate that I will support the Senator from Min- 
nesota in hoping that the conference report will be rejected. 

I should like to review very briefly with the Senator from Minnesota some 
of the rough statistics, which are only statistics and do not tell the real 
human dimension of the farm migrant worker problem we have in this Nation. 

As I understand, there are approximately 1 million migrant workers in the 
United States at the pi'esent time, and this provision to cover migrant workers 
in unemployment compensation, which was put in by a rollcall vote in the 
Senate, would include by rough estimate only about 20 percent of the migrant 
workers and only about 2 percent of the employers. So it is my understanding 
that the provision which was adopted by the Senate was really a very modest 
beginning on what already has manifested itself as being an extraordinarily 
serious problem in this country. 

Mr. Mondale. The Senator is correct. 

Part of the tragedy of the migratory farmworker is that we are not even 
sure exactly how many there are. Our committee held hearings in which 
the statistics that are now officially released by the Department of Agriculture 
on the migratory farmworker were shown to be far from adequate. They 
admit that they do not have basic data, that they make only spot checks and 
random samples to accumulate information, and then they extrapolate data 
from that. They admitted that their own statistics could have wide swings 
of 20 or 30 percent either way, and even then they are not satisfied. The figures 
that the Senator from ]\IassacTiusetts u.sed are the best we have, but we could 
be off a good deal. 

The basic point is that this legislation involves only the large corporate farms, 
such as Coco-Cola, which was discussed at our recent hearings ; and, only a 
modest proportion of the migrant labor force, perhaps 220,000 or 230,000 at the 
very mo.st. 

Mr. Kennedy. Furthermore, as I understand it, the fact remains that these 
migrant workers are not covered at the present time by the minimum wage 
laws, the child labor laws, the welfare and food distribution programs, the 
unemployment compensation laws, or workmen's compensation. The thrust of 



5042 

the amendment we added earlier in tlie Senate would be to begin to Include 
them in this unemployment comi)ensation program, as they should be in- 
cluded, when they have fulfilled the necessary requirements which are as stated 
by the Senator from Minnesota. 

All that the Senate really did at the time it included this was a very 
modest start, but it was a recognition that migrant workers in the United 
States live in desperate kinds of conditions and that they should be protected 
from many of the ravages which they suffer in too many parts of our country. 

I think it is extremely revealing that in many of the States, particularly in 
California, these who have the most direct contact with the entire migrant 
worker problem, whether they be Democrats or Republicans, are in complete 
support of inclusion under unemployment compensation. As the Senator from 
Minnesota knows, from his work as the able chairman of the Subcommittee 
on Migratory Labor, there have been strong disagreements about how the 
migrant worker should be treated. But on this question of unemployment com- 
pensation I have been deeply impressed by the uniform support that the proposal 
to include the migrant worker has received. And supix)rt has come particularly 
from those States which have the greatest contact with migrant workers, 
which know it best and understand it, and which have the great^t sense of 
appreciation for the human tragedies of individuals who are affected by 
the extremely diflScult and uncertain working conditions which would be par- 
tially remedied by the proposed legislation. 

Mr. MoNDALE. The Senator is correct. 

I do not happen to knew where many of these oflieials stand on the 
question of rejecting the conference report ; but on the merits of the issue of 
extending unemployment compensation in the form we see it here, it is sup- 
ported by Governor Reagan, Senators Murphy. Javits, Saxbe, and Schweiker, 
former Secretary of Labor Shultz, the President of the United States, and by 
Senator Kennedy, Senator Williams of New Jersey, and Senator Mondale. That 
should include just about everybody, since so many other of my colleagues 
have expressed sympathy with the hearings and investigations of the Migra- 
tory Labor Subcommittee. 

There is ab.solutely no good reason why farmworkers, the most hard-working 
Americans and the least paid, should continue to be outside the whole frame- 
work of social and economic legislation. We have partially extended mini- 
mum wage coverage for those on large farms, but it is widely violated, and 
is still 30^ below the industrial minimum. We have social security coverage, 
but becau.se many time farmworkers are paid in cash without receipt, or paid 
through unscrupulous crew leaders, and so forth, we figure that thousands 
and thousands of migrants are not being adequately covered under social 
security because it is not enforced. We have crew leader registration laws 
that similarly are being either widely ignored or not enforced. 

Only 17 States have any workmen's compensation laws which extend to 
the farmworker, and most all of those provide voluntary coverage only. A few 
States have extended unemployment in.surance, but on a voluntary basis. 

Even when it comes to child labor laws, there is special legislation for 
children in the fields, for it applies only during school hours, so that youngsters 
of any age can work before and after school, and on weekends and in the 
summer. 

The information we have is that farm work is perhaps as hazardous, if not 
more hazardous, than any other work. Pesticides, mechanical equipment, truck 
and tractor accidents, all contribute to the dangerous aspects of farmwork. Yet, 
there is no occupational hazard legi.slation at all. 

So, time and time again, one thing we can be sure of is that the migrant 
worker is going to he left out. and he is going to continue to be the most 
desperately off, pathetic, and disadvantaged person in Americani life. I think 
that in decent .society this misery and exploitation has to stop somewhere. 

We have had unemployment insurance for 36 years, and more than $50 bil- 
lion has been paid out. 80 r)ercent of the farm work force in this country is now 
coveretl. and we want to include about 220,000 farmworkers after all that period, 
and we are told that we do not know enough about it. I think we know enough 
to know that we are in the mid.';t of a great national .scandal, of a failure of the 
Nation's coon.science, and I think we have a chance to do something about it 
today. 

Mr. Kennedy. There is very little to add to what the Senator has said so elo- 
quently this afternoon. 



5043 

I think it might be appropriate to recognize that the average annual inr 
come for the migrant worlcer, as I understand, is $891. They have a life expect- 
ancy of some 49 years, which is almost 20 years less than the national average. 
Their infant mortality rate is about double the national average. The average 
education completed is less than the seventh grade. Seventy-five percent of their 
housing is substiandard. 

These are the rough statistics, as best we can ascertain. The true situation may 
even be far worse. 

I think these statistics support completely the splendid comment of the Sen- 
ator from Minnesota in talking about the desperate conditions in which these 
people live. I want to applaud the effort that is being made by the Senator from 
Minnesota in this endeavor. I support him completely, and I am extremely 
hopeful that the Senate will follow his recommendation. 

Mr. MoNDALE. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts. 

In light of what has been the continuing and profound interest by the Sen- 
ator from Massachusetts in this whole problem of disadvantaged, poverty- 
stricken Americans, he knows full well that no people in America are more 
disadvantaged than the migrant and seasonal farmworker, and I am proud to 
have his support in this effort. 

I yield to the Senator from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. SCHWEIKE31. I want to make one point that I believe cannot be empha- 
sized too much in this debate. 

I was astounded, after sitting through a number of hearings, to find out 
that by some quirk of fate, we are actually treating our American citizens who 
play the role of migratory farm laborers at a lower level of benefits, considera- 
tions, and all the other health, welfare, and other considerations which are lack- 
ing, worse than a foreign national which we bring into this country to do exactly 
the same job. 

Mr. President, I cannot emphasize this too much, because we are doing this for 
a specific reason. When a foreign national is to come into this country, the 
people that are going to use his labor have to sign an agreement with the State 
and Labor Departments to provide him with certain minimum services and 
fringe benefits like health conditions, sanitation conditions, living conditions, 
and minimum pay — and they must pay according to a certain minimum stand- 
ard, if he is a foreign national. But, if he is an American citizen, and does exactly 
the same kind of work, he is not covered by that. In fact, we have had witnesses 
testify before the committee that those who came in from other countries to do 
similar work to migratory laborers were better treated, had better sanitation, 
better health, better living and transportation conditions than the American 
citizen did. 

That is a pretty sad state of affairs, in my opinion. When we talk about second- 
class Americans, the forgotten Americans, and those slogans which may sound 
trite to us because they are used so often, I do not believe that any other group in 
that category would be able to show that a foreign national coming into this 
country to do the same job gets a worse deal or gets any lesser benefits or con- 
sideration than the American citizen. 

I would just like to make that point. 

Mr. MoNDALE. I thank the Senator from Pennsylvania very much. One of the 
most remarkable revelations in our most recent hearings, which underlines the 
point just made by the Senator from Pennsylvania, was that after the Coca- 
Cola Co. had acquired a subsidiary named Minute Maid and some years had 
passed after that acquisition, the president of Coca-Cola sent some of his key 
personnel to find out how the workers at the subsidiary were living, and how 
they were being paid. 

When reports came back describing minimal living and working conditions, 
they admitted, and admitted before our committee the other day, that their own 
workers were treated deplorably, that the working conditions and the pay levels 
were an utter disgrace. This was the president of the Coca-Cola Co., one of the 
Nation's largest companies, saying that about his own employees and saying 
that it was such a disgrace that they had begun a crash program to, in effect, 
bring those people into the mainstream of American life. I commended this com- 
pany for their efforts, and their courageous admission that problems exist which 
must be corrected, and we all look forward to the speedy implementation of 
their plan for improvements. 

But, the imagination boggles at the living and working conditions and stand- 
ards under which so many of these people have to live, and we have yet to admit 



5044 

to many similar conditions that we must, with a sincere commitment and 
dedication, eliminate. 

Mr. ScHWEiKER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Minnesota yield for a 
question ? 

Mr. MoNDALE. I yield. 

Mr. ScHWEiKER. I should like to ask the Senator from Minnesota if he knows 
of any other labor group in this country, or workers in any other kind of job, 
where one can point to a comparison with a foreign national coming to this 
country, who would get a better deal than the foreign national doing the same 
job. Does the Senator know of any other situation comi>arable to that of our 
migratory workers? 

Mr. MoNDALE. I know of none at all. 

Mr. SCHWEIKER. I think that is a disgrace. 

Mr. :Mondaij;. Maybe the difference is that the foreign national has someone 
IX)werful enough to speak up for him : namely, his own government. 

But, who speaks for the migratory farmer in this country? Whom does he 
elect? Who represents him? How does he get the money to send a lobbyist up 
here? 

Where is his economic power, his political clout, or his Influence? 

The answer is that he is utterly without any power, any influence, or any 
friends that in any way will form a suflScient majority to even insure such a 
small pittance as inclusion for a few of their numbers, under our Nation's 
unemployment compensation system. 

That is why we have the sad situation today in which we have a society which 
has developed so many broad social and worker benefit programs which have left 
the migratory worker out. He is treated not even as an American citizen. Per- 
haps all fanuworkers might be better advised to move to the British West Indies 
and then be represented by that government before taking a job in this country. 
I might qualify that, however, by noting that not even the work contracts 
covering workers from the British West Indies are adequately enforced, after 
resulting in situations of near peonage. 

Mr. Murphy. Mr. President, will the Senator from Minnesota yield? 

Mr. Mondale. I yield. 

^Ir. Murphy. As my good colleague from Minnesota knows, California has, I 
guess, probably more migratory workers, or has as many, certainly, as any other 
State in the Union. 

There is no question in my mind as to the propriety of the concept of the Sen- 
ator's proposal. There are problems. Studies are presently being made. There 
are difficulties in administration. I know all of this. I have discussed it at length 
with my good friend Governor Reagan, and he agrees completely with the con- 
cept. He i>oints out that studies are being made as to the proper way in which 
thLs can be handled and effectively administered. 

I feel that, as has been pointed out here, this is a problem which has been 
much neglected. It will create difficulties, I know, and in some areas will create 
hardships. But, I believe the time has come when the first step should be taken 
to solve this problem. 

As the Senator from Pennsylvania has pointed out, it is unthinkable that a 
foreign national could come into this country and receive better treatment than 
our own American citizens doing the same job the foreign national contem- 
plates. Therefore. I .shall support the Senator's propo.sal and hope that if it 
accomplishes nothing else, it will bring pressure to bear, so that those who 
have the responsibility will, at long last, face up to the problems and fa<"e up 
to the conditions. 

As my distinguished colleague has heard me say so many times, once we 
have the commitment made in this country, there is nothing that is not possible. 
Therefore, in the hope that this will signify the commitment, I shall support 
the Senator's amendment. 

Mr. Mondale. I thank the Senator from California. 

Mr. President. I have been privileged to be a cosponsor with the Senator 
from California in the amendment which was adopted in the Senate last April 
to the unemployment insurance bill, but which was lost in conference. I think 
we stated our ca.se there pretty well. 

Now. Mr. President, I .should like to conclude by quoting a few paragraphs 
from the New York Times article about the life of the migrants : 

"The young Chicano — or Mexican-American — ^migrant will move — -with his 
parents through the citrus groves of Florida or California, stoop over the beans 



5045 

and tomatoes in Texas, hoe sugarbeets in western Kansas, crawl tlirough the 
potato fields of Idaho or Maine and pick cherries in Michigan, moving with the 
season and the harvest. 

"He will sleep, crowded with his family in shells of migrant housing without 
heat, refrigeration or sanitary facilities. He will splash barefoot through 
garbage-strewn mud infested with internal parasites and drink polluted water 
provided in old oil drums. 

"By the age of 12 he will have the face of an adult and his shoulders will form 
in a permanent stoop. He will acquire the rough dry skin and the pipestem 
arms and legs that indicate a lack of vitamins and proteins. He will be sur- 
rounded by children infected with diseases of the intestines, blood, mouth, eyes 
and ears and thus condemned to poor learning records at school — when they 
are able to attend school at all. 

"Dr. Raymond M. Wheeler, a Southern physician who had served on a team 
studying health conditions of the migrants, told the Senators : 'The children 
we saw have no future in our society. Malnutrition since birth has already im- 
paired them physically, mentally and emotionally.' " 

I conclude with his question : 

"What has to be done to convince the Congress of the United States that the 
time has come to put aside its greed, its prejudice, its concern for personal 
power and prestige?" 

I know of no group that has been overlooked longer and at a greater cost in 
human tragedy than the migrant farmworkers of our country. 

I hope that today we will agree to include the modest, minimum proposal to 
extend unemployment insurance compensation to the large corporate farms 
of this country. , 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that three recent articles and edito- 
rials, which are only a few of many that have recently appeared around the 
Nation imploring Congress to act, be printed at this point in the Record. 

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows : 

[From the New York Times, July 24, 1970] 

Pex)nage in the Fields 

Once again the nation's attention has been drawn to the appalling conditions 
that exist among the nation's most exploited and miserable workers, migratory 
farm laborers. This time it is a group of physicians who visited these peons 
in Florida, Texas and Michigan and who have been recounting the horrors 
they saw to the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. As medical men, they 
have been focusing on the sicknesses that plague the workers as a result of 
their abysmal poverty, poor housing and lack of medical care. 

Unfortunately, there is nothing new in this depressing testimony. Since the 
Industrial Commission reports of 1901, several generations of governmental and 
private investigators have told and retold this scandalous story of human 
misery. Yet little has changed over these seventy years, and — if past precedent 
is any guide — the national conscience will soon relax again. 

But precedent need not be followed. The nationwide sympathy that helped 
win contracts for unionized grape pickers in California showed that gains 
can be made in today's more sensitive iwlitical atmosphere. 

The primary need is for Government action to organize the seasonal fann 
labor market so that it is confined to a limited number of persons who can be 
assured decent earnings and acceptable conditions of life and work. That is a 
long-range goal. In the short run. Congress and the state legislatures have the 
obligation to give farm workers all the protections now taken for granted by 
other types of labor ; generally applicable minimum wages, unemployment insur- 
ance, workmen's comi>ensation, etc. For too long this nation has tolerated 
inexcusable discrimination against its most needy workers. That toleration 
must end, and soon. 

[From the Washington Post, Aug. 2, 1970] 

One Victory and the Need for More 

The struggle has been going on for so long that many supporters of Cesar 
Chavez, his farm workers and the national grape boycott may feel a little let down 
now that a settlement in Delano has been reached. But for the workers themselves, 



5046 

those beaten down over the years by poverty wages, by life in shanties and 
jalopies, and with no way to freedom, the settlement is both a personal and an 
economic victory. 

On the latter score, the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee now has 
a contract that calls for $1.80 an hour this year, $1.9.5 in 1971 and $2.05 in 1972. 
plus other wage benefits. Tliis. of course, is no sudden transfer to life on easy 
street, but at least the farm workers of Mr. Chavez are no longer at the mercy 
of the growers ; for many of the latter, mercy was a foreign word. 

During his weary battle, filled with fasts and marches which were always non- 
violent. Mr. Chavez was able to attract a wide national coalition. These included 
the socialites in Southampton and their famous fund-raiser that produced more 
fun than funds, Robert Kennedy who called Chavez "one of the heroic figures of 
our time." George ^leany, Black Panthers and ordinary consmners for whom 
passing up the grape counter at the local market was a solid act of union with the 
oppressed workers. Touched at their cash register nerve, the growers finally 
yielded. 

As Mr. Chavez knows better than anyone, grai^e growers are only one group 
of employers. Only last week, the disclosures of the filth and poverty endured 
by farm workers in the orange groves of Florida showed how desperately a 
Cesar Chavez is needed there. In the larger political picture, it is an indictment 
of Congress that a Chavez is needed at all. As the Catholic Bishops Committee has 
been urging all along in their dispute, farm workers should be protected by the 
National Labor Relations Act, minimum wage laws and unemployment insurance 
programs. But no one is out front doing the legislative work for the poverty- 
cru.shed field hands. 

In the ab.sence of political aid, the same coalition which helped Cesar Chavez 
in the grape struggle will doubtless be ready to help in the melon, lettuce, carrot or 
any other boycott that is called for in the effort to bring justic to those who 
work the field. 

[From the New York Times, July 26, 1970] 

Migrant Workers : A Life of Brutal Hardship 

(By William Robbins) 

Washington. — For a child born with brown skin in one of the southern tier 
of states, of farm-migrant parents who speak a different language from mosjt 
Americans, the future is already charted. 

The young Chicano — or Mexican-American — migrant \\ill move with his parents 
through the citrus groves of Florida or C*alifornia, .stoop over the beans and toma- 
toes in Texas, hoe sugarbeets in western Kansas, crawl through the potato fields 
of Idaho or Maine and pick cherries in Michigan, moving with the season and the 
harvests. 

He will sleep, crowded with his family in shells of migrant housing without 
heat, refrigeration or sanitary facilities. He will spla.sh barefoot through garbage- 
strewn mud infested with internal parasites and drink polluted water provided in 
old oil drums. 

By the age of 12 he will have the face of an adult and his shoulders will form 
in a permanent stoop. He will acquire the rough dry skin and the pipestem arms 
and legs that indicate a lack of vitamins and proteins. He will be surrounded by 
children infected with diseases of the intestines, blood, mouth, eyes and ears 
and thus condemned to poor learning records at school — when they are able to 
attend school at all. 

That was the picture of the Chieano's life painted at a Senate subcommittee 
hearing last week. Dr. Raymond M. Wheeler, a Southern physician who had 
.sen-ed on a team .studying health conditions of the migrants, told the Senators : 
"The children we saw have no future in our society. Malnutrition since birth has 
already impaired them physically, mentally and emotionally." 

NO revelation 

For the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor headed by Walter F. Mondale, Demo- 
crat of Minne.sota, this was no revelation. The subcommittee has been holding 
hearings into these problems for a decade. But Mr. Wheeler awakened an audience 
dotted with the brown faces of a few Mexican-American labor leaders by pointing 
the finger back at Congress. 



5047 

"What has to be done to convince the Congress of the United States that the 
time has come to put aside its greed, its prejudice, its concern for personal power 
and prestige?" he asked. 

The case he made was easily documented. Congress, influenced by the senior 
members from the farm bloc, has specifically excluded migrants and other farm 
workers from workmen's compensation, while the migrants' accident rate is 300 
per cent of the national average. Though the migrants averaged only 78 days 
of work for pay of $891 last year, they are specifically excluded from coverage by 
the unemployment compensation law. 

Ironically, as if to underscore Dr. Wheeler's charge, the House of Representa- 
tives in passing a bill Thursday broadening unemployment benefits, refused once 
again to include farm workers. 

The minimum wage law has been applied by Congress only to the largest 
farms and the minimum for farm Avorkers has been set at 30 cents an hour 
below that for other workers. Employers of migrants who pay by piecework 
avoid even this minimum. 

Migrants and other farm workers also are excluded from coverage by the 
National Labor Relations Act, which protects the rights of other workers to 
organize in an effort to improve their lot. And the child labor law does not 
prevent migrant families from taking their children into the fields to help. When 
no one is able to work, the family rarely qualifies for welfare aid. 

The physicians' testimony was based on study of conditions among migrants 
in counties in Florida, Texas and Michigan. Dr. Gordon Harper, who visited 
camps in Michigan, concluded his testimony with an impassioned indictment : "If 
the only way to insure simple dignity, self-respect and health for our brothers 
is to wait until they can buy their way into a place in our national sun, that 
is a terribly sad commentary on the moral economy of our country." 

The migrant laborers' life expectancy is 49. Their infant and maternal mor- 
tality is 125 per cent of the national average. Their death rates from influenza 
and pneumonia are 200 per cent — and from tuberculosis 250 per cent— of the na- 
tional rate. Their wages are too low to cover medical care, while the $15 million 
that Congress voted for the Migrant Health Act last year is being largely 
absorbed in the local machinery of the Public Health Service. 

The reasons that little has been done for the migrant farmer are not hard to 
see. The 257,000 migrants are not anybody's electorate. At election time, they 
are rarely in a place where they can vote. And even in areas where they are 
most numerous they are a despised minority. 

The Senators on the subcommittee accepted the justice of Dr. Wheeler's 
charge against Congress. "I would like to come away from this hearing with the 
hope that something is going to happen." Senator Mondale said. "The truth is 
we have heard all this before." 



Mr. Holland. Mr. President, several proposals have been advanced here which 
are not in accord with the facts as I know them. I do not mean that they have 
been deliberately misstated. But I do want the record to show the true facts as 
I know them. 

First, I have heard the statement made repeatedly that the Senate bill would 
simply extend unemployment compensation coverage to the large corporate farms. 
That may be true in some States. That is not true at all in my State. There are 
literally hundreds of farmers in my State who are not large corporate farmers, 
but who do employ the eight workers for the period of 26 weeks or more and 
who would be covered by the Senate bill. They are no more corporate farmers 
than are the Senators who are so ardently speaking for the rejection of the con- 
ference report. 

My two closest neighbors in my hometown of Bartow, Fla., happen to be in 
that classification. Each of them has more than eight employees who are reg- 
ular employees on their farms. They are not coriJorate farmers. They are not even 
very large farmers by any description that could be given. 

I do not think there would have been much trouble with reference to the ap- 
proval of the Senate committee bill which applied to farmers from that size 
up, and a great many of them were not corporate farmers. 

The trouble in connection with this matter comes from the amendment pressed 
by the Senator from Minnesota and others which would have included migratory 
workers within the coverage of this unemployment compensation matter. 

Let us state the situation clearly. This means that if I as a farmer were to 
have an orange grove big enough or an orange grove and a vegetable farm big 



5048 

enough to have eight employees for half a year and needed 50 or 75 or 100 harvest 

Ihf S'b^'n'one ,??r' V^^' 7 '""^^^^^ ^'^ ^^ varyinri4riodsTo'ha7ve t 
f^L^ I • mT l^ ^^"""^ ^'-^ *^'^ ^0"^ l^"Of^ mentioned bv the bill and if I 

contrar'v hTtT^o tn' T''' "^"r '"T ^^"'^^^ ^^^"^"^ ^«'^ ^^ter day, but to the 
of the f-i?K of iff. , ^^'f ^^^'^'•I ^»"1<1 fo ^et them-and that hapi>ens to be one 
Flnlid. nri M "i^ofar a, the harvesting of oar highly perishable crops in 

Florida are concerned-no telling how many employees we would have had that 

worL°H"'^v^"t%''^ l'"*T ''''''' '^°^^ ^ ''"^^ «^- ''^''■^^'^ ^ t""e th->- ^^^ufd have 

^Pv mi^hVhJ'"^. "' ?"^ ''' "i"'' "'^•'' '^'^"'^^ ^^'^^'^ l'^^" ^" "^.^ Sf^t^ working. 
They niight have been tliere a few days. Tliey might have been there a few 
weeks. Tliey miglit have been there a couple of months 

They would then go up into Georgia and South Carolina for the peach crop 
They would then go on up in the country, many of them landing in New York or 
^ ermont for the apple harvest or over in Michigan for the cherrv picking or in 
other parts of the country. Tliey move about in such a way as to"make the time 
that they si>end in any one place rather small and the keeping of the books and 
records becomes a rather difficult thing and the combining of these work records 
an almost impo.ssible thing because of the fact that those migrants worked in so 
many States and in so many crops and in so many places. 

The vice of the bill that passed the Senate on this matter was entirely occa- 
sioned by the amendment offered by the Senator from Minnesota, and others 
which brought within the purview of the provision of the Senate committee bill 
the migrant worker. They present a completely different problem from the prob- 
lem of the eight workers who work for half a year on one farm ; they work on 
literally hundreds of farms and groves. 

Maybe the problem in my State is not like that in many other places. However, 
as the Senator knows, most of our crops are perishable crops. Most of our crops 
do require the harvesting costs to be much larger than any other kind of cultiva- 
tion, pruning, fertilization, or other work done in the rest of the year or, for that 
matter, all of the year. 

We have this problem and it makes the bill in the final form in which it passed 
the Senate objectionable to our people. 

My friend the Senator from Minnesota has frequentlly mentioned Coca-Cola. 
May I .say that Coca-Cola is not typical at all of the average farmers in my State 
who would be covered by the bill as it finally passed the Senate. 

Hundreds and hundreds of good people who support our State and are there 
a year or more and who do have eight or more permanent workers have this 
harvest problem. They have to hire migratory workers who. unfortunately, are 
not regular employees. They will work for one man and will then work for 
another man. They will work in one community this week and move to another 
community next week, particularly in the vegetable industry. Usually they will 
work from day to day for different farmers. If anyone were present, for example, 
in the town of Belle Glade, in the heart of the vegetable area of Florida, they 
would find trucks recruiting workers each morning. The workers would pick 
one truck today, another truck the next day, a third truck the third day, and 
so on. 

Of course, they take considerable time to go fishing in the Florida canals, which 
is fine. I want them to have some of the privileges of Florida life just as it is. They 
are better conditioned. 

We know that this migratory worker problem is a serious one. We have been 
trying to solve it for a very long time. I have heard the Senator from New Jersey 
(Mr. Williams), who I think has been the most dedicated worker for the migrant 
worker in the Senate, say on .several occasions he found better conditions in 
Florida in dealing with this situation than he found anywhere else. I heard him 
say, for instance, that the day-care schools for children of migrants were estab- 
li.shed first in Palm Beach County, in my State, and had become a regular fixture 
in many of the vegetable-producing areas of the State. 

I heard him say they had hospitalization provided in the vegetable area of 
Florida, which was the best he found anywhere in any of the States that have 
this migrant problem to deal with. 

I heard him say that so far as education of migrant workers was concerned 
the best situation he found anywhere was in the area around Homestead, Fla., 
where there is so much production of vegetables and other perishable crops. 

I heard so much about the good things that have been done in Florida. I have 
heard so much about the high wage scale that prevails there, and it has to because 
it has to compete with the hotel business, which is in operation at the .same time 



5049 

of the year, and to compete with highly paid industries such as the space indus- 
try and defense industries which make up such a large part of our industrial 
life, and the phosphate industry which is so highly organized and has such 
highly paid workers. So the rate of pay has to be high. Therefore, I am amazed 
that my friends want to pick out the exceptional things and nontypical things 
which are picked out by those who produce documentary films of the things 
typical of the farming situation in my State. 

On behalf of my State I wish to say that the two documentary films that have 
been mentioned relating to Florida, the Merrill film, and the other of 2 or 3 weeks 
ago by XBC, do not show the typical situation in Florida, and as seated by the 
Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Williams), do not paint the typical situation. I 
regret they do not do so. 

I heard my friend, the Senator from Pennsylvania, say something awhile ago 
which was not directed at Florida but that might have been, in that he said 
laborers coming in from outside our Nation are paid more than those from 
inside our Nation who do exactly the same work. I do not know what my friend 
was referring to, but I can refer to two situations which I happen to know a 
little about, where the facts are as follows : 

We are allowed by the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture 
to bring into Florida about 9,000 cane cutters each year. The only reason we 
are allowed to do that is becau.se cane cutters cannot be found in the United 
States who are willing to do that work. What is that work? It is work on one's 
knees in the muck, cutting the stalks of cane by hand with machetes. It is very, 
very hard work ; it is very disagreeable work. Secretary of Labor Wirtz told us 
several years ago it would be impossible to find domestic workers. He went over 
to the State so ably represented by the chairman of the Committee on Finance 
(Mr. Long), and found 70 of them and brought them back to Florida to cut cane. 

When they looked at what had to be done in Florida, where we grow our cane 
in the muck, they said, "This is not what we call cutting cane. We call cutting 
cane going along after the machine on harder soil in Louisiana" — which is harder 
soil than muck — "and we can't attempt this work." The majority of them never 
went into the fields at all. They went back to Louisiana or somewhere, all at the 
expense of the growers and they refused to go into the fields. Some of them 
did go into the fields but in 10 days they had all left except one and he was in 
the hospital because he cut himself with a machete. He was in the hospital for 
a good many weeks at the expense of the grower. 

It was only then that Mr. Wirtz said : "I admit we cannot find workers in 
America to cut cane in the Florida cane fields." 

What are the facts? In the first place, one cannot find American workers to 
do it so it cannot be said that those who are brought in are paid more than 
American workers to do the same work. There are no American workers to do 
that work. In the second place, the minimum pay is fixed by the Secretary of 
Agriculture and it is $1.65 per hour so far as our State is concerned. It was that 
amount last year and it will probably be more next year ; but that is a minimum 
wage. 

The work is piecework. The average pay, I am told, in all sectors of the sugar 
indus*^ry is about $2 an hour for these something like 9,000 workers who come 
in. From where do they come? They come from Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad, and 
some of the smaller islands in the Caribbean. So there is no problem concerning 
what they receive compared with similar American workers because there are 
no similar American workers who will do that work. 

The second group that I know about are the Basque sheepherders. I inquired 
about the number of those people brought in to herd sheep. I have inquired 
several times. The last time I inquired there were 1,700 of them. They are in 
the arid areas of the West. The Secretary of Agriculture allows them to be 
brought in for a period of years. They are required to be paid rather good pay. 
My recollection is they receive $200 per month and up. The reason they are 
brought in is, again, Americans cannot be found who are willing to keep the 
sheep, go through those arid areas, and sleep with the sheep in corrals where 
sheep have to be kept at night. Americans will not do that work so there can be 
no comparison between the pay of these Basque sheepherders and the amount 
paid Americans doing the work because few Americans will do that work. 

I am told there are some Latin Americans in the southwestern part of our 
country who will do that work and they are required to be paid at the same 
rate. Everyone wants to be fair about this matter. 

It is hard for one who has lived all his life in the area and who knows 
something about the situation there to preserve his temper here when statements 



5050 

are made with reference to conditions which are not typical of what prevails. 
The statements are made by highly reputable Senators, in good conscience, trying 
to do the right thing. But I do want to say it is not fair and it is not right to 
pass the bill in the shape it pas.sed the Senate after the amendment was added 
whereby a farmer — not a big, corporate farmer but an ordinary farmer — who 
had to have eight workers to maintain his grove or farm, would be responsible 
for unemployment insurance for those migrant workers who picked the crops. 
They all prefer local people but there are not enough of them. We have to bring 
in a great many workers to do the harvest work. 

They are not stable workers. Many of them do not stay on any job for any 
fixed i)eriod of time. By the very nature of their work, they do not stay in our 
State for any long iieriod of time, because they go up and down the country to 
harvest the perishable crops. 

If there is any reasonable way to include them within the coverage of such an 
act as this, I do not .see what it could possibly be. 

I want us to be fair to them. I have insisted, with my growers, year after year, 
tJiat they improve situations in Florida, and they have done so. I have insisted 
on better housing. Our legislature passed a housing act which was commended 
here on the floor by the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Williams). My 
legi.slature has pas.sed health acts which apply to migrants, which have been 
approved, here on this floor. We are always trying to get a better and more 
uniform handling of the situation. It is being handled decently and properly 
and in a Christian way by the great majority of our growers. It is being handled 
inhumanely and improperly, and I think vicious,ly, by some growers. We are 
attempting to improve that condition every year, and we are doing so. 

Now to try to bring about this kind of result by imjwsing Federal law on 
unemployment ins^urance provision that covers not only regular members but 
those who come for a few days during the harvesting season, and do not even 
stay in one place permanently during that particular harvesting season, but 
who travel from place to place within one State, is not a rea.sonable way to 
handle this problem. I think there are ways to handle it. I think migrant work- 
ers can be given permanent legislation that will better take care of them. 
But I see no reason at all why it was sound judgment for the Senate to adopt 
the amendment here that put migrants, uncontrollable as they are as to their 
time and as to their work, in the same classification with the permanent workers 
who do abide on the proi>erty and who are entitled to have the protection. 

It happene<l that when I was Governor of our State we passed and I signed 
into law, a bill giving workmen's compensation to those permanent workers 
who worked in the packinghouses, the concentrate plants, and other places 
where the preparation of the crop moves forward. We have not found any way 
yet, in our State at least, to deal as fairly as that with the migrant workers, 
though we have tried to take care of them imder decent housing laws, under 
decent health laws, under decent education .laws, and, of course, under pay rates 
that enable them to make excellent pay if they just want to work and earn it 
and make it. 

Mr. President, I commend the distinguishetl Senator from Louisiana and the 
other Senators who are with him on the Finance Committee for the kind of 
bill they brought out of the committee. I wi.'^h it had been the provision of that 
bill that passed on the subject. I wish the amendment offered here by the Sen- 
ator from Minnesota, bringing the migrants under the provisions of that bill, 
had not been adopted. I think there would have been no trouble at all if it had 
not been added on the floor. 

I hope that the conference report wnU be approved. It has great merit in it. 
It extends coverage, as the Senator from Louisiana has accurately stated, 
and as the Senator from Delaware has accurately stated, to a gi-eater number 
than were covered even under the original Senate committee bill. I congratulate 
them upon the goofl work they have done. But I do not think we should .<4end 
this bill back to conference with the hope of this wrong thing being done — and 
it would be wrong to try to add the migrants. 

There are other ways to handle the problem. I stand ready to help in reach- 
ing tho.se way.s. But I am not at all ready to include the migrant workers under 
this unemployment compen.sation act. The defeat of the provision is due to 
the inclusion of that unwise amendmenr, becaust^ I am very sure that the 
work of the committee would have prevailed but for the inclusion of that 
unwise amendment. 



5051 

The committee reported a provision that made the unemployment compensa- 
tion applicable where there were eight workers or more, for 26 weeks during 
the year; and I do not think anybody would protest at all against that. That 
certainly did not apply only to large corporate farms. It applied in our State to 
dozens or more of independent farmers, orchardists, vegetable producers and 
to the eight stable and permanently located and good, serving, and honorable 
workers, in their fields or in their groves. 

I hope the conference report will be adopted. I apologize to the Senator for 
taking so much time. I am trying to uphold his position, because I think he 
has a good conference bill and I think the Senate should approve it. 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, I shall be very brief about this matter. Four year.s 
ago the Senate went to conference with the House of Representatives on a bill 
of about this magnitude. It involved approximately 60 million workers, and 
would have extended benefits for an additional 13 weeks during times of reces- 
sion. That bill died in Congress because there were certain minimal Federal 
standards which the Senate was willing to accept, and although many States 
met those standards, organized labor and the administration were so deter- 
mined to apply some minimal Federal standards as a starting point that they 
were willing to have that bill defeated rather than accept what had been done 
in conference. The House was adamant. 

We were quarreling about something that involved about 1 percent of what 
wag in the bill. It was, nevertheless, an issue that defeated a bill that was in 
the interest of the working people of the country and that should have become 
law. 

"We face a similar situation today. We have passed a bill that is of benefit, 
potentially, to 61 million working men, women, and their families. The bill 
that was reported back brings into coverage about 4.7 million additional jobs, 
comprising perhaps 80 percent of all the additional jobs which could be covered. 

So we are urged to reject the conference report really becau.se we are not 
able to extend the benefits of this bill to about 250.000 farm and migratory 
workers, for whom the Senator from Minnesota has expressed concern. 

Mr. President, I admire the Senator for his concern about this number of 
people. But it should be remembered that there are more than 300 times as 
many workers who would be favorably affected by the passage of this bill as 
there are for whom the Senator would speak today. It is for those workers 
that this bill would provide extended benefits with coverage for the first time, 
to whom coverage would be denied if this bill should fail. 

Mr. President, in my judgment the bill would fail, just as a similar bill failed 
4 years ago, if this conference report were not agreed to. That would seem very 
sad to this Senator, to see this bill fail to benefit 61 millon people becau.se we were 
not able to extend the benefits of the bill to cover about 250,000 more. 

Mr. President, I know how determined the members of the House Ways and 
Means Committee are on this issue. They have prevailed on a rollcall vote by a 
vote of about 219 to 170, and the leaders of that fight on the House floor were 
the same conferees we had to negotiate with. They are not going to yield on this 
issue ; if the Senate votes the bill down, I say there is every possibility of a rep- 
etition of what happened 4 years ago. and 61 million i^eople whose families would 
otherwise benefit must suffer because we have been unable to benefit 250.000 
more. When we are benefiting 61 million workers, I think it would be extremely 
unfortunate if, in trying to get everything the Senate has sought to do, we 
failed to get any of it. 

That being the case. I think the Senate would certainly want to agree to this 
conference report. 

I would point out that this is not the only provision we have available to us 
to help these migrant workers. The House of Representatives has indicated that it 
is willing to help them, under the public welfare system, by passing the family 
assistance plan we are presently considering in the Senate Finance Committee. 

I know of no Senator more willing than I to help people who are willing to 
work ; and that certainly describes the people the Senator from :Minnesota would 
like to assist. In so far as the Senator is correct in saying that the average in- 
come of those families is about $800 a year, that family assistance bill could 
increase the Federal assistance, in cash alone, for such persons to about $1,600 
per family. And no Senator who wants to do so would be prevented from offering 
an amendment, either in the committee or on the floor, to extend food stamps to 
those ijeople, thereby perhaps increasing their income four-fold, as compared to 
the figures quoted by the Senator from Minnesota here today. 



5052 

Furthermore, Mr. President, there is nothing to prevent a State from passing 
laws to benefit the people that the Senator from Minnesota wishes to help, and 
some States have. I would urge others to do the same. 

If thi.s conference report is not agreed to. we would l>e performing a disservice 
to 61 million workers in this country who would potentially benefit from the bill 
before us. Therefore I very much hope that the conference report will be agreed 
to. 

Mr. Dole. Mr. President, in 1935, (Congress passed the unemployment com- 
pensation program as part of the Social Security Act. The puriwse of this legis- 
lation was to provide a temi>orary .source of income for millions of individuals 
who had suddenly found themselves out of work. This system was not devised as 
a handout : but as a means to enable millions of Americans to with.stand economic 
hardship by providing compensation already rightfully earned. 

On July 19, 1969, President Nixon, recognizing unemployment compensation's 
inherent worth, proposed to Congre.ss a bill which would expand its benefits and 
strengthen its framework. 

In his message, the President stated that the purposes of the proposed legisla- 
tion were "to extend unemployment insurance to 4,800.000 workers not now cov- 
ered; to end the shortsighted restrictions that stand in the way of needed 
retraining efforts: and to add a Federal program automatically extending the 
duration of benefits in periods of high unemployment." Furthermore, he stated : 

"In human terms, the recommended changes will enable a worker to weather 
the adversity of unemployment and to find a suitable job." 

The conference report on H.R. 14705 is the congressional response to the ad- 
ministration's proposals. Several changes have been made in the original proposal. 

The conference report increases coverage of State and Federal unemploy- 
ment compensation by 4,750,000 jobs, the biggest single improvement in coverage 
since the system began in 1985. Of the 4.75 million new jobs proposed to be 
covered : 1,130,000 are in small business ; 210,000 are traveling and city sales- 
men, and agent commission drivers engaged in the distribution of certain prod- 
ucts ; 190.000 are in agricultural processing : 160.000 are held by U.S. citizens 
working for American employers overseas; 2,121,000 are in nonprofit organi- 
zations, excluding church-operated organizations, and schools other than a 
school of higher education ; and 940,000 ai'e in State hospitals and institutions 
of higher education. 

Mr. President, there are some who argue that these provisions go too far and 
others who argue that they do not go far enough. 

More specifically, there are those who urge the defeat of this important confer- 
ence report because it excludes coverage for 250,000 farm employees. Delay and 
disagreement over this one provision might well endanger the entire bill as in 
1966 when similar legislation died in conference for lack of agreement. Sending 
this bill back to conference may mean that we will have to wait another 5 years 
to vote on these innovative features. 

An important provision of this bill is the extension of the Federal-State un- 
employment compensation program. Twice, in 19.58 and 1901, Congress enacted 
laws that extended unemployment compensation on a temiwrary basis during 
an existing recession. This method of providing unemployment aid during na- 
tional recessions helped offset the effects of prolonged unemployment, but it 
provided relief only on a piecemeal approach. 

To remedy this deficiency, the President requested that the individual States 
or the Nation as a whole automatically be eligible for additional unemployment 
comix'nsation after the exhaustion of regular benefits during periods of high 
economic unemployment. H.R. 14705 calls for two indexes to trigger the l)enefits. 
Nationally, there would be an "on" indicator when unemployment equaled or 
exceeded 4.5 percent for the three most recent calendar months and a national 
"off" indicator when unemployment remained below 4.5 percent for each of 3 
con.secutive month.s. The State indicator would be "on" for any individual State 
when, for 13 con.secutive weeks, the unemployment rate in the State is 20 per- 
cent higher than the corresponding period of the 2 preceding calendar years, 
l»rovided that the current rate equaled or exceeded 4 percent of covered em- 
ployment. The State extended benefit period would end when either of these 
conditions were not met. 

Tlie amount of extended compensation a State would be required to pay would 
be .50 i)ercent of the total regular comi^ensation including dependent's allowances, 
payable to an establishefl limit. This 50 i^ercent is payable on a 50-50 matching 
basis with the Federal Government. 



5053 

Had this legislation been in effect over the past 12 years, the national "on" 
indicator would have been activated for three periods — 1958-59, 1960-62, and 
1963, covering a total of 41 months, and extended national benefits would have 
been available. 

In my home State of Kansas, during the years 1958, 1960, and 1961, the State 
"on" indicator would have applied extended State benefits over a i>eriod of 12 
months. 

Extended benefits would now be available in 10 States if the present bill were 
now in effect, and if those States had passed legislation providing for participa- 
tion in the extended program. 

When President Nixon introduced this legislation, he stated : 

If the economy were too slow and employment were to rise, this program auto- 
matically would act to sustain personal income. This would help prevent a down- 
turn from gathering momentum resulting from declines in purchasing power. 

The President introduced this legislation during a period of low unemploy- 
ment and urged its passage. Now, in a period of higher national unemployment 
and much severe local and regional unemployment, the case for swift approval 
of this legislation is clear and convincing. Mr. President, I urge approval of the 
conference report. 

Mr. Bennett. Mr. President, migrant farm work is like no other work in the 
world. It is a job here today, and maybe a job there tomorrow. Migrant farm 
workens never really become a part of the labor force ; at best, they are seasonal 
woi'kers everywhere they go. They are not hired by farm operators to do specific 
jobs ; rather, they are assigned to jobs by crew leaders. The migrant farm 
worker leaves his work because the crew leader tells him the job is over. He 
does not look for work ; his crew leader looks for work. On any job, he does not 
know who his legal employer is. Under these circumstances it would be difficult, 
and perhaps impossible, for unemployment insurance administrators to deter- 
mine when the migrant was unemployed, when he was available and willing to 
work, and the circumstance of his leaving his last job. 

A migrant worker will work in several States, for i>erhaps dozens of employers. 
In each case, he may work 1 or 2 days for an employer and be unemployed 
for 1, 2, or 3 days. Is he going to be able to claim total or partial unemployment 
for a rainy day or a rainy week? And if he does, how do you determine when 
he is available for work and the circumstance under which he left his last job? 
It seems clear that whatever the worker said, it would be more practical for an 
employer to show that he was unemployed through his own fault, or that he 
is not available for work and should not be paid unemployment benefits. This 
would be in the employer's interest because of the effect benefit payments could 
have on his experience-rate taxes. 

There is always a serious question as to the identity of the employer of a 
migrant worker. In some cases, the crew leader is really the employer ; in others, 
the farm operator is. But in all cases, there is a reasonable question as to who 
the employer is. Under social security, this is determined by references to a 
single Federal law, but under unemployment insurance this would be determined 
under the laws of the various States. In one State, the employer might be the 
crew leader — but in an identical situation in the next State, it might be the farm 
operator. Thus, the legitimate question of who would pay the unemployment 
taxes, which the committee provision would have avoided, was raised when the 
floor amendment was adopted. If you are unable to identify the employer under 
State law, or if there is litigation, the migrant worker would have no effective 
coverage, regardless of a Federal law saying that he is covered. 

You can be sure of one thing about this kind of situation : the crew leader is 
going to insist that the farm operator is the employer, and the farm operator 
is going to insist that the crew leader is the employer, because neither one of 
them is going to want to pay the tax. I might add that the poor migrant worker 
is not likely to know which one of them was his employer because the question 
really turns on local law. In either event, the House conferees pointed out that 
the Senate-passed farm coverage amendment would start off by breeding need- 
less litigation. And the House conferees were not willing to become party to bar- 
ratry by legislation. 

There were also questions as to how the seasonal employment provisions of 
State laws would apply to migrant workers. In some States, workers engaged in 
seasonal industries cannot qualify for unemployment benefits outside their reg- 
ular working season. In other States, there are no such restrictions. Thus, for 
the migrant worker who works in several States — States with and without 

36-513 O — 71— Pt. 8-A 6 



5054 

seasonal restrictions — it might be necessary to combine his earnings in all States 
in order to determine the benefits payable for a si^cific week. For the next week, 
however, only those earnings in one or two States might be used. Thus, unem- 
ployment insurance benefits might have to be revised from week to w^eek be- 
cause the season in one State might end while the season in another State would 
start. 

We were also faced with the question of how the migrant farmworker would 
know who his employers had been when it came time for him to claim benefits. 

When the migrant worker is employed by the farm operator, rather than a crew 
leader, he may work for a different employer on each day of the week ; and in 
order to claim benefits, he will have to tell the employment oflSce where he files 
a claim and who he has worked for throughout the entire year. Tliis would be a 
tremendous task for an educated man who can read, write, and keep records ; 
but for the uneducated semi-literate — and sometimes non-English si)eaking mi- 
grant worker — it would be an impossible task. Moreover, the farm oi)erator would 
know the near imi)ossibility of a worker ever identifying him and would tend to 
avoid paying unemployment taxes. Thus, the coverage of migrant workers who 
are employed by farm operators would probably be a meaningless gesture until 
such time as administrative techniques are developed for dealing w-ith this 
problem. 

Moreover, when a migatory worker hires himself out directly to a farm opera- 
tor there is a question of whether he is truly an employee, or an independent 
contractor. If he is the former, the unemployment tax could ai>ply. If he is the 
latter, it would not apply : and I must say that when a farmer engages a migrant 
worker with instructions "to pick all the beans in the field" there is a serious 
doubt that he is truly an employee. 

Then, too, when the migrant family works, there is a question as to who is the 
employee. 

In a lot of cases, it is not a migrant worker alone who does the farmwork. It is 
the migrant's family : his wife, his older children, and even his 5-, 6-, and 7-year- 
old children in some cases. The individual family members, however, may not 
be paid as individuals on the basis of the amount of work done, but tlie head of 
the family may be paid for everything done by the family. Under the unemploy- 
ment compensation laws, the family earnings are not his earnings, and whatever 
is reported for him might have to be investigated to see how much was earned 
by him. by his wife, and each of the children. Of course, if each member of the 
family does enough work to qualify for unemployment compensation, each might 
\)e able to qualify for unemployment benefits. Ho\vever, it would be nearly impos- 
sible to determine who earned how much and from whom. 

The information presented to the Senate by those who oppose the conference 
report did not come to grips with these problems, but carefully avoided them. 
The Senate conferees, however, could not ignore these considerations and even 
had they been so disposed, the House conferees made certain that the issues were 
fresh and sharp in the minds of the Senate conferees. 

I would have preferred to have salvaged some part of the farnnvorker cover- 
age amendment, but the House would not yield even one little bit on this issue. We 
were faced with a take-it-or-leave-it situation in which we could have no bill or 
a bill without farmworker coverage. This is still the situation. The remaining 
features of the bill are worthwhile ; and I believe that we should take the bill for 
the good that is in it, rather than let the whole thing go down the drain because it 
has not everything we would like. What is in the bill is good, and I suggest 
that we approve the conference report and try again for farmworker coverage 
after the special study of this issue — called for by the conference agreement — 
has t)een completed and analyzed. Perhaps then we can answer the questions 
which tfKlay remain unan.swerable. 

Mr. Cranston. Mr. President, I support the effort of the distinguished Sen- 
ator from Minnesota (Mr. Mondale) and the distinguished Senator from Ohio 
(Mr. Saxbe) to reject the conference report on H.R. 14705, the Employment 
Security Amendments of 1970. 

I do so, not because I am opposed to the unemployment insurance system. 
I believe that, except for the exclusion of farmworkers, this legislation is 
desirable. 

I supiK)rt this move to reject this conference report because I do support the 
concept of unemployment insurance, and because I believe the time is long past 
when Congress can continue to exclude farm labor from the protections and 
benefits that have been accorded to nearly all of the labor force in the Nation. 



5055 

I believe that farmworkers should have the benefits of unemployment insurance, 
particularly because their work is seasonal. 

During the summer and fall in California, unemployment among farmworkers 
is reasonably low. In the winter months, however, it is extremely difiicult to 
find any kind of farmwork. Unemployment insurance is clearly the best remedy 
for the cyclical nature of agricultural employment. In the absence of a reasonable 
unemployment insurance system, farmworkers are forced into a welfare system 
which is too often paternalistic and demeaning. 

There is no reason why the people who pick our crops, who harvest our food, 
should be treated as wards of the State or as second-class citizens. 

A vote to reject the conference report will put the Nation on notice that the 
Senate will not tolerate the exclusion of these workers from the conditions 
enjoyed by other Americans. 

Mr. Yabbobough. Mr. President, today we have before us a bill of great 
importance to all American working people. H.R. 147(^ embodies the most sig- 
nificant amendments to the Unemployment Compensation Act since its enact- 
ment in 1935. Since this program was first put into action during the heart 
of the depression, it has furnished a measure of stability to those Americans 
who have found themselves without work. 

Unfortunately, the Unemployment Compensation Act, like so many other 
Federal and State laws, excludes from its coverage farm workers. Probably 
no other single group of Americans need the protection of the Government more 
than farm workers, however, through the years, these citizens have been sys- 
tematically denied the benefits of most Federal labor legislation. 

Realizing that the time had come for Congress to face its responsibilities to 
American farm workers, the Senate included in its version of H.R. 14705 a pro- 
vision which would extend the coverage of the Unemployment Compensation Act 
to farm workers who are employed on farms employing eight or more employees 
in each of 26 different Aveeks during the year. This provision was not aimed 
at the small family farmer but rather at the large farmers and growers who 
hire farm workers, on a regular basis. The Senate recognized that the small 
farmer who hires workers only during a brief harvest period, would have diffi- 
culty complying with the requirements of the Unemployment Compensation Act; 
therefore, the requirement that the farm employs eight or more workers was in- 
serted to exempt small farmers. In the language of the Senate report : 

"The provision would thus not affect the typical family farm or a farm 
employing more than eight workers for only a brief harvesting season." 

This provision is, however, meant to apply to those large farming operations 
which employ thousands of migrant workers each year, and have, in many 
cases, failed to provide these workers with decent housing and fair wages. 

The Subcommittee on Migratory Labor of the Senate Labor and Public Welfare 
Committee recently conducted extensive hearings on the plight of migrant 
workers in America. The evidence produced at those hearings clearly demon- 
strated that the life of the migrant farmworker is not improving but rather is 
getting worse. I have visited the homes and working areas of farmworkers in 
Texas and from my experience with these unfortunate people, I am convinced 
that the only way to improve the working conditions and lives of farmworkers is 
for Congress to bring these people under the protection of Federal laws. 

The provision contained in the Senate version of H.R. 14705 concerning farm- 
workers represents a positive step forward in this area. I am deeply disturbed 
by the conference committee's failure to include it in the final version of H.R. 
14705. Because I firmly believe that it is imperative that Congress expand its 
coverage of the Unemployment Compensation Act to include farmworkers, I shall 
vote against accepting the conference report and urge all of my colleagues to do 
likewise. 

SUPPORT FOR UNEMPLOTMENT COMPEXSATION COVERAGE FOB FABMWOBKEES 

Mr. GooDELL. Mr. President, with one overriding flaw, the conference report 
on H.R. 14705 is quite good. That unemployment compensation bill would extend 
the coverage of the unemployment compensation program to additional jobs, im- 
prove the financing of the program, and provide the States with a procedure for 
obtaining judicial review of adverse determinations by the Secretary of Labor. 

The conference bill would, in particular, establish a permanent program of ex- 
tended benefits for people who exhaust their regular State benefits during periods 
of high unemployment. In this period of recession, I am especially anxious to see 
that provision enacted. 



5056 

Nevertheless, I will vote against acceptance of the conference report and for 
recommital to conference with instructions, because the conference bill fails to 
cover farmworkers. Th Senate i'lnance Committee amended the bill so as to 
extend coverage to employees of large farms, those farms which employ at least 
eight employees during each of 26 different weeks during the year. That pro- 
vision, which was ixissed by the Senate, would have covered only 2 percent of all 
farm employers — approximately 22,000— aJid 20 percent of all farm employees — 
approximately 250,000. 

Relatively few agribusinesses would be covered under this provision, and only 
the quite large ones. The original administration proposal, in fact, called for 
coverage of farm employers who have four or more employees in each of 20 dif- 
ferent weeks during the year. It is unfortunate that the conferees did not emerge 
with that provision. 

The Senate also passed an amendment offered on the floor by Senator Mondale 
to extend coverage to farm crew leaders and their employees-migrant workers. 
This amendment, together with the Finance Committee's amendment, was dropped 
in conference. 

Given the almost universal coverage of all other members of the labor force 
by the unemployment compensation system. I believe that it is inequitable to 
exclude agricultural workers, from coverage, and that there is no justification 
for the conference bill's discrimination against them. 

Accordingly, I will support recommital of the bill to conference with instruc- 
tions that the two farmworker provisions — the Finance Committee's and Sena- 
tor Mondale's — are to be insisted upon by the Senate conferees. In recognition 
of the need for recession benefits, I trust that the conferees will move swiftly and 
that we will soon see an improved conference bill enacted with provision of 
extended bnefits during periods of high unemployment. 

The Presiding Officer (Mr. Cranston). The question is on agreeing to the 
conference report. On this question, the yeas and nays have been ordered, 
and the clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. 

Mr. Long (after having voted in the affirmative). On this vote I have a pair 
with the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Harris). If he were present and voting, he 
would vote "nay." If I were permitted to vote, I would vote "yea." I therefore 
withdraw my vote. 

Mr. Pell (after having voted in the affirmative). On this vote I have a pair 
with the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Ribicoff ). If he were present and voting, 
he would vote "nay." If I were i3ermitted to vote, I would vote "yea." I therefore 
withdraw my vote. 

Mr. Kennedy. I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Bayh), the 
Senator from Nevada (Mr. Cannon), the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Dodd), 
the Senator from North Carolina (Mr Ervin), the Senator from Arkansas 
(Mr. Fulbright), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Gore), the Senator from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Harris), the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Hart), the Senator 
from Indiana (Mr. Hartke), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. HoUings), 
the Senator from Minnesota, (Mr. McCarthy), the Senator from South Dakota 
(Mr. McGoveni), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Metcalf), the Senator from 
New Mexico (Mr. Montoya), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Nelson), are 
necessarily absent. 

I further announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Randolph), 
the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Ribicoff), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. 
Russell), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Symington), the Senator from Georgia 
(Mr. Talmadge), the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Tydings), are necessarily 
absent. 

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada 
(Mr. Cannon), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Ervin), the Senator from 
West Virginia (Mr. Randolph), would each vote "yea." 

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Michigan 
(Mr. Hart), would vote "nay." 

Mr. Griffin. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Aiken), the 
Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Baker), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Hruska) 
and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Tower) are necessarily absent. 

The Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Mundt), and the Senator from Maine 
(Mrs. Smith) are absent because of illness. 

The Senator from Maryland (Mr. Mathias) and the Senator from North 
Dakota (Mr. Young) are detaine<l on official bu.siness. 

If present and voting, the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Aiken), the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mr. Baker), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Mundt), the 



5057 



Senator from Maine (Mrs. Smith), and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Tower) 
would each vote "yea." 

The result was announced — yeas 50, nays 19, as follows : 





[No. 254 Leg.] 






YEAS- 


-50 




Allen 


Dominick 




Mclntyre 


AUott 


Eagleton 




Miller 


Anderson 


Eastland 




Moss 


Bellmon 


Ellender 




Packwood 


Bennett 


Fannin 




Pearson 


Bible 


Goldwater 




Percy 


Boggs 


Griffin 




Prouty 


Brooke 


Gurney 




Proxmire 


Burdiek 


Hansen 




Scott 


Byrd, Va. 


Hatfield 




Smith, 111 


Byrd, W. Va. 


Holland 




Sparkman 


Church 


Inouye 




Spong 


Cook 


Jackson 




Stennis 


Cooper 


Jordan, N.C. 




Stevens 


Cotton 


Jordan, Idaho 




Thurmond 


Curtis 


Magnuson 




Williams, Del 


Dole 


McClellan 








NAYS- 


-19 




Case 


Kennedy 




Saxbe 


Cranston 


Mansfield 




Sphweiker 


Fong 


McGee 




Williams, N.J 


Goodell 


Mondale 




Yarbo rough 


Gravel 


Murphy 




Young, Ohio 


Hughes 


Muskie 






Javits 


Pa store 






PRESENT AND 


GIVING LIVE PAIRS, 


AS 


PREVIOUSLY REC 


Long, for. 








Pell, for. 










NOT VOTING- 


-29 


Aiken 


Hartke 




Randolph 


Baker 


Hollinga 




Ribicofl 


Bayh 


Hruska 




Russell 


Cannon 


Mathias 




Smith, Maine 


Dodd 


McCarthy 




Symington 


Ervin 


McGovern 




Talmadge 


Fulbright 


Metcalf 




Tower 


Gore 


Montoya 




Tydings 


Harris 
Hart 


Mundt 
Nelson 




Young, N. Dal 



So the report was agreed to. 

Mr. Long. Mr. President, I move that the vote by which the conference report 
was agreed to be reconsidered. 

Mr. Holland. Mr. President, I move that the motion to reconsider be laid 
on the table. 

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. 

Senator Mondale. Senator Saxbe, do you have any questions? 

Senator Saxbe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Doctor, as you know, we are interested not only in the migrant prob- 
lem but in the general health problem, in this committee. We have had 
quite a bit of testimony as to how we can get medical care to people 
even if these people are not migrants. If they are poor, they still need 
medical attention which they are not getting. 



5058 

The Surgeon General and others have testified before us that at the 
present time the doctors just aren't available to staff the kind of out- 
ixitient clinics that are necessaiy or to do the fieldwork that is 
necessary. 

Do you have any suggestions on how better delivery of medical care 
might be accomplished in your State or in the Southwest? 

Dr. Wheeler. Senator Saxbe, the problem of the adequate delivery 
of medical care to all the people of our country is an extremely com- 
plex one, as you know. There is no simple solution that I can think of. 
It involves adequacy of numbers of medical and paramedical person- 
nel ; it involves more efficient means of delivery of care or greater use 
of that technology' in bringing that c^re to the people. 

One of tlie things that it involves most of all at this point, at least 
in a nation which has no national health insurance program, is the 
sufficiency of doctore for people to be able to buy medical care. If they 
can't get it, of coui-se, they can't buy it. 

Senator Saxbe. This is what we hear from the AMA but I just 
question this. If you liave 200,000 physicians with 175,000 of them prac- 
ticing, all working and working hard, and most of them are — if you 
just put more money into the thing, does that help ? 

Xow, this, it seems to me, has been the kind of thinking which has 
brought us to the present place. Everybody says we will put more 
money into the program. You put more money in the program but you 
don't make more doctoi-s. 

Dr. Wheeler. No ; you are correct. We certainly at this point do not 
have enougli doctors in this country the way they are presently being 
utilized. As a matter of fact, I am certain that we could do a much 
better job of delivering medical care to the people of this country if 
the services of doctors were utilized in a much more effective way. 
There are many, many doctors in the country today who could help in 
this problem if their servicer were being more adequately utilized. 

Senator Saxbe. Do you think the Federal Government is going to 
have to go to the doctor and say, "Look, you are wasting your time ; 
you are not providing service; we will tell you how to spend your 
time." 

Do you think that is what it is going to come to ? 

Dr. Wheeler. I hope not. I hope there is enough concern about this 
problem and interest and enough willingness to exert leadership on the 
part of physicians, not only on the national level in our associations, 
but also in our communities, that with the increasing pressures to do 
something about these problems the medical profession will assume its 
responsibility and participate with lay people at all levels on the plan- 
ning of how to get medical care to people. 

Senator Saxbe. One of the problems we face is the increasing pres- 
sure of the various colleges of surgeons and internists and so on to 
increase the qualifications. Recently, I believe this year, it was proposed 
that they add another year to surgical residence. 

I have a son in surgical residence. He has been there 3 years. He has 
2 more to go ; and 2 years in the Army. He will be 33 years old before he 
hits a clinic. 

It seems to me that we have to do something to get people at the local 
level to run a clinic. Now, they all want to go to the medical center and 
have offices next door to each other and pass people around. But I feel 



5059 

very strongly that we have to have 3-year general practitioners. We 
are doing tJnis at Ohio State this year. We are starting a 3-year program 
and no internship. They spend 3 years in medicine and they go out. 
They are not going to be able to do brain surgery and things like that 
but they can certainly take care of the complaints and detect things 
that can be referred. 

Now, can this be an answer ? 

Dr. Wheeler. This is one of the things I am talking about when 
I talk about the effective utilization of medical personnel. The length 
of time it takes to train a doctor is unnecessarily long, in my opinion — 
that is just one thing — and the failure to train and to utilize a large 
number of paramedical personnel who can do a great many things 
that doctors now have to do. 

I think the fee-for-service system in itself has built into it all sorts 
of inefficiencies that make for poor medical care. I think there need 
to be many more prepaid plans, and there should be a countrywide 
program of national health insurance to extend to everyone the benefits 
that medicare and medicaid are now attempting to extend. 

We are a little bit off the subject of my responsibility. 

Senator Saxbe. We are, and we are not. The three of us, I know, see 
eye to eye because we supported this outpatient clinic amendment to 
the Hill-Burton Act. But if outpatient clinics were available at these 
migrant camps, even if you had to put them on trucks and haul them 
around — obviously the people you saw had not seen a doctor for a long 
time or had any medical treatment. 

Your testimony indicates, and this is what we hear constantly, 
chronic cases where children are dying from illnesses that obviously 
reflect no medical attention at all. 

If we can get more mobile facilities that move from camp to camp 
and at least have a sick call once a week, we would go a long way 
toward curing some of the things you referred to here; could we not? 

Dr. Wheeler. It would help a great deal. 

Of course, along with that there has to be also a very vigorous 
attack on sanitation, on housing, on water supplies, on sewage dis- 
posal, garbage pickup; all these things. Otherwise, you are simply 
putting labandaid on a horrible wound. 

Senator Saxbe. This is generally resisted at the camp level. 

Dr. Wheeler. Resisted by who ? 

Senator Saxbe. By the camp owners. 

Dr. AVheeler. Yes, sir. Very little cooperation. They make no effort 
in that direction at all, none. 

Senator Saxbe. That is all I have. 

Senator Mondale. Senator Yarborough. 

Senator Yarborough. Doctor, I have followed your statement with 
great interest and, despite the failure of the executive departments to 
implement the laws of Congress, I want to tell you that this is one 
committee of Congress that is concerned over this problem, has been 
for at least 10 years, the Labor and Public Welfare Committee. 

In mentioning hunger as being the basis of this, let me point out 
that the first hunger hearings that I recall started with this commit- 
tee in 1967 and the leaders were Senator Robert Kennedy and Senator 
Joe Clark, of Pennsylvania. They went into the Delta, they went into 
California and said the people were starving ; there was hunger. There 



5060 

was an assault on this committee generally by the press of America by 
saying there is no hunger, there is slander, politically motivated. They 
wrote editorials in paper after paper, including my own State. 

After a year of investigations, many of those same papers changed 
and the editorials said there is hunger in America, there is malnutri- 
tion in America, and we have to do something about it. 

A survey was made of my State. Nearly all the people on the team 
were from Texas so that they would not be open to a charge that they 
brought in outsiders. They had made a similar survey in Guatemala. 
They had found -conditions of hunger in areas of Texas very similar 
to the areas in Guatemala. 

The efforts of this committee ran jurisdictionally into the opposi- 
tion of the Agriculture Committee of the Senate. So, to keep that 
problem of conflict from stymieing the work, it was agreed that a 
S]:>ecial Select CcHiimittee on ISIalnutrition and Hunger would be es- 
tablished. The Senator from South Dakota is chairman of that com- 
mittee. I am a member of that committee as a representative of the 
Labor Committee. 

We continued work and we put in more money ; we added an amend- 
ment on the floor of $500 million for that, additional money, for the 
school lunch program. 

But the tragic thing about it is, as you have pointed out in all the 
testimony before that committee, we asked the question. How much 
would it cost to end hunger in America? That question was asked of 
Secretary of Agriculture Freeman in January of last year just before 
he left office. Acting with his staff and knowledgeable people, he said 
a billion dollars. That was the lowest estimate we had. 

The highest estimate— and the only people we asked were the people 
who know the prices of food and deal with distribution — Avas $3 bil- 
lion. The highest estimate we had from anyone to end the hunger in 
America was $3 billion a year. They have been spending $3 billion a 
month in South Vietnam for years. 

We saw news media, that used to sweep this under the rug, say we 
spent $110 billion on the war in South Vietnam. The debilitating cost 
of that war is pulling down American society. It did not cause hunger 
in America; we have had it all these generations, but it has held down 
the money. 

People decry the expenditures, say you are spenders, spenders. The 
strange thing is when we spend money on food they call us spend- 
thrifts. They never call spendthrift anybody who votes for the 
squandering of that money in Southeast Asia. From the national re- 
source standpoint alone, and the health and strength of this Nation, 
it is folly. It IS absolute folly. 

You put your finger on that. In one of the paragraphs of your pre- 
pared statement, among other thint^s you mention, "How can the 
Congress and our Nation's leadership pretend to be related in any 
sane way to the world around them when they spend all of their 
money, and that is the big drain, in Southeast Asia. 

I think when we put up the money to build the tiger cages and go 
and inspect them and know they are there, we are just as responsible 
for the tiger cages as any petty dictator in South Vietnam. We gave 
them the money and we sent our supervisors around there to see them. 



5061 

I assure you there are concerned people. We are intelligent enough 
to know the cost. Those of us who have been working on that, a number 
of us, Robert Kennedy was assassinated; 2 years before that Paul 
Douglas was defeated in Illinois; 2 years ago, Wayne Morse on this 
committee and Joe Clark on this committee, two of the most active 
men in this field, were defeated. I was defeated May 2. 

Now, we all have intelligence enough to know when you try to do 
something for the poor you run a great risk of not coming back. But 
the encouraging thing is that each time one of us is liquidated politi- 
cally or otherwise, there is another man waiting. You see him here in 
Mondale of Minnesota, Kennedy of Massachusetts, Cranston of Cali- 
fornia, Hughes of Iowa, Eagleton of Missouri on the full committee. 
There are more standing ready to take their places. 

So, I think the movement for justice in this field is going to grow. 
I don't thmk the fact that a nimiber of us get politically liquidated is 
going to stop the movement for justice in America for food and med- 
ical care. 

Senator Saxbe has put his finger on one thing, the avarice that has 
kept America from educating enough doctors. Let us face it. We have 
had such a monopoly that we could not get enough medical schools. 
We have 160 doctors per 100,000 population. Soviet Eussia has 280 
doctors per 100,000 population. They are educating just as fast as they 
can, increasing their medical schools to get 360 doctors per 100,000 
population. They have found that is the size of a medical corps that 
it will take to care for the health of the people. For each doctor, they 
have a medical assistant that we are beginning to provide for in our 
law. Something like a half 'vvtay doctor, you might say, not a physician 
or surgeon but the medical assistant, one for each medical doctor in 
Russia. 

We, being the richest and most affluent Nation that the world has 
ever seen, camiot remain down where we are in health for the people. 
We can no longer remain 21st among the nations of the world in the 
average longevity of a male child. 

A male child born in America, as you know, being a doctor, has an 
average shorter life than a male child born in 20 other nations on 
earth. Our infant mortality rate puts us down about 14th among the 
nations of the world. This is a shame, it is a thing that must be 
alleviated. 

I have been on this health subcommittee for 12 years, and have sup- 
ported every measure to improve the health of our citizens, like the 
one to build 20 new medical schools and dental colleges under the 
Hill-Burton Act. I floor-managed the action recently in which we over- 
rode the Presidential veto on putting a mere two and three-quarter 
billion dollars more for 5 years to build hospitals and outpatient 
clinics. We know that is a token based on the needs but that is all we 
could pass. 

I want to say that this committee is concerned and has been working 
on this for years. We pass laws in the Senate but by the time they 
get through the conference with the House they are always less. 

We had a $6 billion hospital bill we passed out of this committee 
and it passed the Senate, $6 billion for 5 years. When we finished 
with the House in a conference, we were lucky to get out with two and 
three-quarter billion dollars. 



5062 

So, what is needed is something to strike the conscience of the 
Nation. AVe need a reorientation of national priorities so that the 
healtli and education of the people become foremost objectives of this 
Government, not bragging about what the kill ratio is in South Viet- 
nam, not bragging about how many tons of bombs we drop. We 
dropjxxl month after month a greater weight of bombs on North Viet- 
nam tlian were ever dumped on Germany and Japan together in 
World War II. 

The thing we ought to brag about and put in headlines on the front 
page is how much hunger we have alleviated in this countrj^, how 
much disease we have cured, not how many people we have killed. 
AVe have to turn from a death-oriented society to a health-oriented 
society and improve the health care for the people in this country. 

Yours is one of the most powerful statements I have seen in 12 years 
on the hcaltli subcommittee. 

Thank you for the contribution you are making to alleviate the 
conditions of life in these ITnited States. 

Dr. Wheeler. Thank you, sir. 

Senator Mondale. Dr. Wheeler, we have interrupted your fine state- 
ment on several occasions, so I order it printed in its entirety at this 
point in the hearing record. 

(The prepared statement of Dr. Wheeler follows:) 

Prepared Statement of Raymond M. Wheeler, M.D., Charlotte, N.C. 

My name is Raymond M. Wheeler. I am a phy.sician engaged in the private 
practice of Internal Medicine in Charlotte, N.C. I am a member of the American 
Medical Association, a Fellow of the American College of Physicians, and am 
certified as a s.pecialist in Internal Medicine by the American Board of Internal 
Medicine. I am also President of the Southern Regional Council, an organization 
of black and white Southerners, who for twenty-five years have sought and 
worked for equal opportunity for all citizens of our region. 

During the past three years I have studietl the health and living conditions 
of the poor in North Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Southwest Texas, 
Appalachia, and in the ghettoes of Northern cities. I have examined children, 
talked to their parents, and visited their homes and schools. I have .served as 
a member of the Citizens' Board of Inquiry into Hunger in the United States 
which published the rei)ort entitled Hunger, U.S.A. I have testified before com- 
mittees of both the House and Senate of the Unitetl States concerning the exist- 
ence of hunger and malnutrition throughout this country. 

In January and again in April of thi.s year I traveled with other medical 
colleagues in Southern Florida observing the health and living conditions of 
migrant farm \vorker.s. In March of this year, my colleagues here today and I 
visitetl Hidalgo county in Southwest Texas. We were part of a medical team of 
about twenty-five physicians, medical students and technicians. There we spent 
five days examining farmworkers and their families, talking with tliem and 
other members of the community, and visiting homes and labor camps in which 
the people live. 

Beginning with our visits to Mississippi and Alabama in 1967 and including 
our trips to Florida and Southwest Texas this year, the efforts of all the physi- 
cians involved in this work have been sponsored and encouraged by the Field 
Foundation. The purpose of our .studies and our reports have always been the 
same. We have sought to observe and study the life situations of children of the 
poor, in order to bring their condition to national attention. Their condition is 
one of sickness and poverty, isolation and neglect, indifference and exploitation, 
resiUting in tens of thousands of children who exist in our country today without 
hoi)e, denietl their basic rights as human beings, and condemned to lives of pain, 
frustrations, and de.spair. In our minds there can he no question about this fact. 
It seems equally certain that this tragic situation is directly related to another. 
In our affluent, money-oriented .society, human needs o? children have been 
subordinated to political and economic interests. 



5063 

It would not be consistent with our beliefs or our purpose to portray those 
interest as intrinsically evil. Rather, we see them as basically uninformed, in- 
sensitive, and uncaring about the vast and irxeparable harm that is being done 
not only to children, but to the very fabric of a society in which these children 
must live and take their places as adult citizens. 

Wherever we went, in the South, the Southwest, Florida, or Appalachia the 
impact was the same — varying only in degree or in gruesome detail. 

We saw countless families with large numbers of children, isolated from 
the mainstream of American culture and opportunity, possessing none of the 
protections of life and job and health which other Americans take for granted 
as rights of citizenship. 

If the fai-mworker is injured in the field or if he becomes ill from exposure 
to pesticides (we heard of and saw many instances of both situations), he does 
not receive Workman's Compensation. If he is sick or cannot find work (and 
there are many days when work is not available) he does not receive unem- 
ployment in.surance. There is no realistic minimum wage to guarantee him ade- 
quate pay for his work. If Social Security payments are deducted from his 
wages, few records are kept by the crew boss on which he can later base a claim. 
He has no health or hospital insurance to provide him with minimal medical 
care and he does not earn enough to purchase it The farmer is not even pro- 
hibited from working young children in the fields if the i)arents, desperate for 
enough money to buy food and shelter, choose to take their children out of 
school or bring along their pre-school age children to pick the vegetables. 

We saw housing and living conditions horrible and dehumanizing to the 
point of our disbelief. In Florida and in Texas, we visited housing projects, 
built with public funds, which defy description. We saw living quarters con- 
structed as long cinder-block or wooden .sheds, divided into single rooms by 
walls which do not reach to the ceilings. Without heat, adequate light or venti- 
lation, and containing no plumbing or refrigeration, each room (no larger than 
8x14 feet) is the living space of an entire family appropriately suggesting slave 
quarters of earlier days. I doubt if the owners of fine racing horses or dogs 
along the East Florida coast would think of housing their animal property in 
such miserable circumstances. 

We saw many different kinds of housing and perhaps some of the worst 
from the standpoint of structural soundness (owned by those who lived there) 
did not create in me the feeling of outrage that some of the "better" housing 
did. For example in Dade County we looked at quarters operated by the Home- 
stead Housing Authority with public funds. There someone had sat down at 
a drawing board and deliberately and callously designed a living unit which 
consisted of a single room with concrete block walls, divided partially by a 
block-partition which jutted out in the center of the room. There was one door 
and one small window high up under the ceiling. The room was dark and damp 
at mid-day. There was nothing in that unit to make it habitable. There was not 
one gesture toward providing either comfort or basic human needs — no source 
of water, no toilet, no refrigeration, no heat, and the lighting was so dim that 
no child could have possibly been able to read or study. This was the creation 
of a public authority, a place in which it was willing for other hvmian beings 
to live. 

Can you imagine the effects on a child of living in such a situation — the 
physical discomfort of the heat, the cold, the dampness? The absence of fresh 
air and the crowding greatly increases the likelihood of transmission of con- 
tagious disease. This is why so many have tuberculosis as well as chronic 
respiratory infections. How is it possible for a child to study and perform in 
school when it is impossible for him to read by the light available to him? How 
can he possibly be emotionally well-adjusted when he has no privacy — when he 
lives in a cage? How can he possibly stay awake in school the following day 
when he has attempted to sleep in a bed with three or four of his brothers and 
sisters? 

How can this be, in a society such as ours, with the values we are presumed to 
cherish? 

In all of the areas we visited, the nearly total lack of even minimally adequate 
medical care and health services was an early and easily documented observa- 
tion. Again, that which most Americans now agree to be a right of citizenship, 
was unavailable to most of the people whom we saw. The standard procedure of 
requiring cash for services and a cash deposit before hospital admission, places 
an impossible burden upon those least able to afford the high cost of being sick. 



5064 

Documentation of discrimination in medical services and denial of medical care 
will l>e (iesorihefl during the course of the hearings. 

We saw hundreds of i>eople whose only hoi>e of obtaining medical care was to 
become an emergency which could not 1h> turned away. We heard countless 
stories of driving 50 or 100 miles to a city general hospital after refusal of care 
at a local hospital. Mexican-American citizens of the U.S. told us of crossing 
the border into Mexico for dental and medical treatment which was less expensive 
and for care which was kinder, more humane than they could obtain in their 
own communities. We heard of diagnoses and treatment by nurses, endless 
waiting for simple procedures such as immunization of small children, and 
degrading treatment by medical i>ersonnel. 

A few statistics substantiate our obser\-ations. The migrant has a life expec- 
tancy twenty years less than the average American. His infant and maternal 
mortality is 125% higher than the national average. The death rate from influ- 
enza and pneumonia is 200% higher than the national rate and from tubercu- 
losis, 250% higher than the national rate. The accident rate among migrant 
farmworkers is 300% of the national rate. 

We know from these statistics alone that the migrant and seasonal farm- 
workers live shorter lives, have more illnesses and accidents, lose more babies, 
and suffer more than the rest of us. Everything that we saw and heard in 
Florida and Southwest Texas bore out this knowledge. 

From the moment we set foot in Hidalgo County until we departed, our medi- 
cal team was engulfed by a seemingly endless procession of distraught and 
anxious parents, bringing their elderly relatives and their families of six, eight, 
or ten children — seeking medical treatment which they could not obtain in their 
own communities. Most of these people live constantly at the brink of medical 
disaster, hoping that the symptoms they have or the pain they feel will prove 
transient or can somehow be survived, for they know that no help is available 
to them. Only two groups have any hope for relief : Those who are somewhat 
better off financially and those who are mo.st critically ill. Some of the people 
we saw were not seriously ill, or perhaps not ill at all, but none of them knew, 
and most had never had the opportunity to find out, if they were healthy or 
whether tomorrow might bring disaster. Our group was not equipped to offer 
very much in the way of definitive treatment for the vast amount of illness we 
saw. Perhaps the most constructive and most helpful acts that we performed 
involved the opportunities to assure some, who had never seen a physician 
before, that they were, indeed, well and could continue their struggle to survive 
without the nagging fear of physical disability or death. 

For the rest, the majority of the hundred.s of people we examined, it was a 
different, frustrating, and heartbreaking story. We saw people with most of the 
dreadful disorders that weaken, disable, and torture, particularly, the poor. 

High blood pressure, diabetes, urinary tract infections, anemia, tuberculosis, 
gallbladder and intestinal disorders, eye and skin diseases were frequent finding 
among the adults. 

Almo.st without exception, intestinal parasites were found in the stool speci- 
mens examined. Mo.st of the children had chronic skin infections. Chronically 
infected draining ears with resulting partial deafness occurred in an amazing 
nimiber of the smaller children. We .saw rickets, a disorder thought to be nearly 
abolished in this country, and every form of vitamin deficiency known to us that 
could be identified by clinical examination was reported. 

I doubt that any group of physicians in the pa.st thirty years has seen, in this 
country, as many malnourished children assembled in one place as we saw in 
Hidalgo County. 

There is one place I remember particularly — a labor camp in Weslaco, a small 
town East of McAllen. 

As we walked between the rows of dwelling units, many small children played 
around us, running about barefooted through mud and pools of .stagnant, refuse- 
filled water — the perfect culture medium for intestinal parasites, polio, and 
bacteria causing infectious diarrhea which kills so many children. 

We stopped and examine<l children at random and almost every child had 
some preventable physical defect. We saw tiny youngsters drinking rice water 
out of bottles becau.se their mothers had no milk to give them. Chronic skin 
infections, both fungae and bacterial, were practically a 'normal' finding. 
Rickets is supposed to be a rather rare disease the.se <lays but we saw one 
child after another with deformed ribs and legs, thickenetl wrists which are 
the classical landmarks of the disease. One youngster, standing apathetically 



5065 

near a group of playing children, had all the stigmata of advanced protein de- 
ficiency — sparce, thin, reddish hair, thin dravpn face, protuberant abdomen, 
and thin, wasted extremities. 

We stepped into one single-room dwelling unit where lived parents and six 
children. Amazingly, it was spotlessly clean in spite of the fact that the nearest 
source of water was a block away. 

On the bed lay a 3-month-old infant, who weighed less than the average new- 
born. It was emaciated, restless, wailing, and occasionally pulling at a bottle 
which we soon discovered contained sour milk. There was no refrigerator in 
which to keep formula. The child had been ill for weeks, according to its mother 
but at its last visit to the clinic, a day or two earlier, no medication had been 
prescribed. A very quick examination disclosed pus pouring from its right ear. 
We made arrangements for the child to have penicillin and individually packaged 
feedings of formula which the mother could not afford. I suspect we were too 
late and I doubt if the child survived. 

What I have just attempted to describe in Weslaco is documented on film taken 
by Martin Carr of NBC. When the decision was made to confine the documen- 
tary on the migrant to Florida, that film was not used and remains in the pos- 
session of NBC. It is my hope that it will be preserved and made available to the 
nation, for it portrays conditions which cannot be adequately described by mere 
words. 

Because of the tremendous numbers of people who sought our help in a lim- 
ited time, we interviewed and examined entire families as a unit. In one tiny 
rural settlement, with a medical student assisting me, I spent an entire day 
examining one family after another. It was a shattering experience. 

Their dietary histories were all the same — beans, rice, tortillas, and little 
else. The younger children, especially, were undersized, thin, anemic, and 
apathetic. The muscles of their arms were the size of lead pencils — a sign of 
gross protein malnutrition. Many had evidence of multiple vitamin deficiencies 
and almost without exception, their skins were rough, dry, inelastic with the 
characteristic appearance of Vitamin A deficiency. I remember vividly the 
shock I received when one young boy was brough in who was well nourished 
and I touched his skin — warm, soft, resilienit — unlike any I had seen all day and 
I called to the student with me to come and put his hand on that child in 
order that he might refresh his memory of what a healthy skin feels like. 

The children we saw that day have no future in our society. Malnutrition 
since birth has already impaired them physically, mentally, and emotionally. 
They do not have the capacity to engage in the sustained physical or mental 
effort which is necessary to succeed in school, learn a trade, or assume the full 
responsibilities of citizenship in a complex society such as ours. 

In 1967, my medical colleagues and I traveled through the Mississippi Delia 
and rural Alabama. There, we saw hunger and poverty and human misery to 
a degree that we had not dreamed possible in afiiuent America. In 1970, two 
and one-half years later, we have found in Florida and Texas, rich and fertile 
states, other forgotten Americans, living and working in near slavery, their 
children living and dying in conditions as dreadful as any we had previously 
encountered. 

It is not likely that we saw more malnutrition or more human misery than 
we had seen in the Delta. Perhaps, in the time that we were there, we did not 
experience as much overt hostility expressed by the white community as we 
had sensed in Mississippi and Alabama. 

In the Delta, mechanization of the huge farm industries had rendered thou- 
sands of people useless to the economy, and they were left to die or to sur- 
vive as best they could. In some instances, it seemed clear that there was an 
unspoken conspiracy to solve the problem by making life so intolerable that 
people were forced to flee the land and the state in which they could no longer 
earn a living. No longer needed and unable to secure help from the white com- 
munity, the black Mississippian at least had the freedom to leave, if he were 
able, and to seek a better life elsewhere. 

In Florida and Texas, the farm worker remains a valuable asset to the owners 
and operators of the huge farms which produce food and fruit for the nation. 
Without them, corn and tomatoes would rot in the fields and oranges and 
grapefruit would shrivel on the trees. There is no way that these farms can be 



5066 

operated without the migrant work force which moves about the area, harvest- 
ings the beans and squash this week, moving on to gather the avoeadoes another 
week, in another county. Mechanization has not yet devised a way to replace 
them. 

What is different in Florida and Texas from the rest of the rural South 
is the deliberate, cruelly contrived, and highly effective system which has been 
devised to extract the maxiniiun work and productivity from other human beings 
for the cheape.st possible price. Every effort is directed toward isolating the farm- 
worker from the rest of .society, maintaining him at the lowest level of subsistence 
which he will tolerate — then making certain tliat he has no means of escape from a 
system that holds him in virtual i^eonage. And to that end, the grower has the full 
cooperation of the Federal government, the state, and the local community. 

At this point in my rei)ort, in order that what I say next will not be misinter- 
preted, I would like to express my high regard and respect for the members of 
the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor and my admiration for the hard work, the 
commitment, and the efforts of all of you in your attempt to better the life of 
the migrant. No one has done more. 

At the same time, I have questions which I feel must be raised or I will not 
have carrie<l out my resix)n.«ibility to you or to the people about whom we are 
both concerned. These questions relate to the reasons for this hearing and the 
many hearings which have preceded it on the same and related subjects. You are 
perhaps even more aware than I of the volumes of information and the days of 
testimony which are already available to you and to the Congress, documenting 
the fact of children in our midst who are stunted physically, dulled mentally, and 
warped emotionally — children who are deprived of all opportunity to become 
productive citizens — children who will grow up to become wards of society or 
worse — perhai>s hostile, alienated, and destructive. 

I have here a copy of a report of the President's Commis.sion on Migratory 
Labor, written and submitted to President Truman in 1951. Even a cursory ex- 
amination of its pages will reveal that the plight of the migrant has not changed 
significantly during the intervening nineteen years. 

What does it take to make us care about our children? The picture we saw is 
one of a society thriving on greed, cruelty, alienation, and fear — a society which 
either never had or has completely abandoned the concerns, the ethics, the ideals 
which make dignity and freedom possible. 

^^^^at has to be done to convince the Congress of the United States, the most 
lX)werful group of men in the world, that the time has come to put aside its greed, 
its prejudice, its concern for i^ersonal power and prestige — and to be concerned 
for the kind of .society in which our children must live together? 

You, and only you, can change all this. How is it possible to justify the end- 
le.ss words and the devious political maneuvers which have delayed and with- 
held meaningful aid to children who don't have enough to eat, children whose 
parents have no jobs and no money for food or medical care? How can the 
Congress and our nation's leadership pretend to be related in any sane way to 
the world around them when they spend their time and the nation's wealth 
building roads and guns and planes and elaborate governmental buildings while 
families live 10 or 12 in one room without water, heat, ventilation or even a 
place to wa.sh their hands? 

And children die — even worse — most of them live, numbed by hunger and 
sickness, motivated only by an instinct for survival, crowded into the ghettoes 
of horror which abound in our country which produce desperation and loss of 
faith in our system. Our answer .seems to be more police, more guns, and more 
punitive law'S whenever they protest. 

We came away from Florida and Texas with tremendous admiration for the 
leaders of the i>eople we met. These men. often at great risk, working to give 
their people hope and leadership which would dispel their apathy and despair. 
In many re.spects these people were stronger than most of us. They endure what 
.'jeemed to me to be the unendurable, with patience, humor, and understanding. 
Remarkable in view of the misery which surrounds them and the iwwerlessness 
they experience. They have not given up the hope that we, who can help, will 
someday raise our voices and say that there are .some things in our country 
which are intolerable, that these things can be changed, and must be changed. 
Our time is running out 

Senator Mondale. I think we should now turn to Dr. Lipscomb. 



5067 

STATEMENT OF HARRY LIPSCOMB, M.D., DIRECTOR OF THE 
INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, BAYLOR COL- 
LEGE OF MEDICINE, HOUSTON, TEX.; AND MEMBER OF THE CITI- 
ZENS BOARD OF INQUIRY INTO HEALTH CARE SERVICES 

Dr. Lipscomb. Senator Mondale, Senator Saxbe, and fellow Texan, 
Senator Yarborough : 

I am Harry S. Lipscomb, M.D., director of the Institute for Health 
Services Research, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex., and a 
member of the Citizens Board of Inquiry into Health Care Services. 

For the past several years I, like Dr. Wheeler, have been trying 
to get a fix on the problems of the poor, the disenfranchised, and the 
migrant workers in our country. I speak of the people in the cities 
as well as people in the rural areas. 

You have requested that we tell you of the findings of a group of 
physicians who recently surveyed the health conditions of migrant 
and seasonal farmworkers in south Texas. I do so with reluctance, 
because I am ashamed, as an American, of what we saw; and con- 
cerned, as a physician, that my colleagues and I have failed to act as 
leaders in the face of demonstrated need, to structure the delivery of 
our services so as to reach every man, woman, and child in our Nation. 

Dr. Wlieeler has given an overview of what our team observed in 
Texas and Florida. I will now document our findings in the Rio 
Grande Valley. 

From March 3 through March 8 of this year, our health team ex- 
amined patients in clinics and "colonias" of Hidalgo and Starr Coun- 
tieSj Tex. Histories and physical examinations were performed on 1,400 
individuals, the majority of whom were Mexican-Americans living in 
and around the City of McAllen, Tex. This team, which consisted of 
15 physicians, 10 medical students, four technicians, and two nurses, 
saw patients from early morning until midnight for 4 consecutive days. 
On some, we performed blood counts, urinalysis, chest X-rays, pelvic 
examinations, and stool cultures. In addition, we collected drinking 
water from six "colonias" for bacteriological examination. 

It had been our intent to examine 50 families in great depth, but 
we were confronted on March 4 by over 900 people who lined the 
streets around the small clinic in which we worked. We had intended 
to document, but not treat illness. 

Within the first hour it became clear that the people had come for 
treatment, and their manifest need was so overwhelming that we 
hastily arranged with a neighboring pharmacy to provide medications 
and Antamins. In 4 days, we prescribed and administered in excess of 
$6,000 worth of drugs, which were subsequently paid for by the Field 
Foundation. 

The McAllen area was selected because of an expressed need of the 
community, and in addition, a well-documented nutritional study of 
that region was reported to the Select Committee on Nutrition and 
Human Needs of the LT.S. Senate — (90th Congress, second session, and 
91st Congress, first session : "Nutrition and Human Needs," part 3, the 
National Nutrition Survey, pages 880-922. I am sure that the mem- 
bers of this committee are familiar with the document. Following our 
visit, we have often had occasion to refer to it. 



5068 

Two years after the report was submitted, 15 months after the in- 
auguration of the sui^plus commodities program, 7 yeare after the pas- 
sage of the Migrant Health Act, little has changed. Disease, malnutri- 
tion, and human suH'ering continue. This in the face of more than $6 
million in farm subsidies, significant civic improvements, new roads 
and highways, and new hospital construction assisted by Hill-Burton 
funding. 

In short, the Mexican-American is still a disadvantaged person. 

This report will simply relate what we were able to document from 
our clinical impressions. X-rays, and other supporting laboratory data. 
It would be impossible to identify a specific cause for many of the 
conditions: we will describe a child with a cleft palate which had not 
been surgically repaired, a patient who needed glasses and had not 
gotten them, a mother with a cer\'ical infection which had not been 
treated, or a person who did not have adequate dental care, each con- 
stituting documentable evidence of disease. 

On the other hand, that these conditions have occurred, or have not 
been remedied may be ascribed to ignorance or lack of awareness on 
the part of the individuals, to lack of availability of services, or to 
economic barriers which cannot be identified in all cases, with certainty. 
"We simply cannot link disease to the reason for the disease except in a 
few isolated instances. 

We would like to say that all malnutrition which we saw was due 
to an inadequate commodity program in Hidalgo and Starr Counties, 
or that poor dental care was due to a limited number of dentists and 
the high initial cost for care, but we do not believe that a survey of this 
kind can be so used. For every case of health hardship we saw involv- 
ing lack of physicians, inadequate funds, or improper food, we saw a 
balance of patients who, for socio-cultural reasons or lack of educated 
health "awareness," failed to seek care. Perhaps in the culture of 
poverty, failure to seek reflects the hopelessness of poverty, the apa- 
thetic despair of a culture which has done without for so long that 
even the aspiration for care is lost. 

This very apathy and despair which has characterized every poor 
community I have visited is, unfortunately, used as evidence that the 
poor will not avail themselves of our services if they are provided. I 
believe the overwhelming turnout of the people of the Rio Grande 
Valley to our accessible clinic gives the lie to this popular misconcep- 
tion. These people are hungry for care. They are dying for want of it. 

We note in the hearings on migrant labor the persistent effort some- 
how to define a migrant as subhuman. "They like to drink ; they will 
destroy property if you give it to them ; they are lazy. If you give them 
enough to eat, they won't work. They are gypsies." These descriptions 
of the impoverished are the means by which those able to help seek 
to excuse themselves from the responsibility to help. 

Any inference that the poor don't want medical care is an outrageous 
stab at logic. To say that they 'like to be sick' is only an excuse. Of 
course, what happened in this overpowering response to our brief 
stay in the community is more than enough proof that sick people 
desperately want care. 

In our hearings at McAllen, we heard repeated statements from the 
poor that they did not go to the hospital because they thought they 
were going to be insulted ; they didn't have money for the fees, and 



5069 

they probably would be turned away and sent somewhere else. Many 
families, for example, would not think of having their babies delivered 
in a hospital. They were afraid that the mother and the child would 
be held in the hospital until the bill was paid. 

Senator Yarborough. They have been told that they would be held 
until the bill would be paid. I don't know that the hospital adminis- 
trator told them that. It seemed some hospital attendant told them that 
and the word spread like wildfire. 

Dr. Lipscomb. I often hear the justification for poverty that no 
matter what one does for the poor, they will not, of their own volition, 
don't aspire to something a little better. It is also said that if the poor 
seek a better life. I believe there are very few suppressed peoples who 
are given $1,000 they will spend it; they don't know how to handle 
money. It is a rationalization that they are prolific, irresponsible, 
lazy, and will not do the proper thing even if we provide for them. 
These are totally senseless arguments when related to provisions for 
the health sanitation, feeding, and education of the poor in our country. 

In analyzing the results of our study, we have been able to classify the 
conditions which we saw into the following categories : 

1. Infectious disease. 

(a) Bacterial. 

(b) Viral. 

(c) Spirochaetal. 

(d) Pungal. 

(e) Parasitic. 

2. Toxic disorders. 

3. Metabolic disease. 

4. Nutritional disease. 

5. Neoplastic disease. 

(a) Benign. 
(h) Malignant. 

6. Traumatic injury. 

7. Congenital disease. 

8. Degenerative disease. 

9. Dental disease. 

10. Speech, hearing, and vision defects. 

11. Mental, emotional, developmental, and learning disorders. 

1. INFECTIOUS DISEASE 

Bacterial and viral infections were the most common, often hygiene 
related, conditions we observed. In these two areas we really have quite 
effective methods for treatment, so that it cannot be reasoned that poor 
health is an irremedial situation. 

The bacterial infections which we observed included otitis media, 
bronchitis, laryngotracheobronchitis in children, conjunctivitis, 
uveitis, acute and chronic follicular tonsillitis, pyelo-nephritis, ure- 
thritis, and impetigo. Associated inflammatory conditions, perhaps of 
non-bacterial or'igin, included cholecystitus, gastritis, and esophagitis. 

In regard to hygiene, we found nursing mothers with mastitis (in- 
fection of the breast), and on two occasions Ave examined bottles of 
milk for infants which were contaminated and the milk soured. 

Viral diseases were common. Many children and entire families were 
suffering from upper respiratory infections. A number of communica- 

36-513 O— 71— Pt. 8-A 7 



5070 

ble childhood diseases were seen, including rubella. As you know, there 
is a national campaig:n to protect our child-bearing women from in- 
ternal uterine rubella. This disease can be eliminated in our country in 
the next 10 years. 

Senator Moxdale. Did you see any effective anti-rubella (measles) 
campaign underway in that community among the poor migrants? 

Dr. Lipscomb. I did not. 

It is some significance that shortly after we left, an epidemic of 
poliomyelitis occurred in the Valley, resulting in three deaths. Tliis 
is the only poliomyelities reported in the United States in 1970. If it is 
reasoned that the Mexican l)order is an open seeding source, then our 
very protection lies in immunization. "We have failed to provide pro- 
tection for the Rio Grande valley communities in this critical area. 

Senator Yarborougii. Doctor, was that polio promptly reported? 

Dr. Lipscomb. I do know that Dr. Casso saw a few of these cases. I 
suspect the first one was difficult to diagnose because Ave have not seen 
polio recently. 

Senator Moxdale. "We have an article concerning that polio epidemic 
that I will order inserted in the record at this point. 

(The article referred to follows :) 

[From the Valley Morning Star, Weslaco, Tex., July 17, 1970] 
Apathy Still Factor in Battle of Polio 

WESLACO. — Anna Isabel Trevino has full brown eyes that brim with the 
si)ecial shine of a 2-year-old. 

And she has that special smile that carries a child through happy or hard 
times. 

Her grin never really changes. But the times have. And they are bad for the 
tot from Rio Bravo, Tex. 

She lies in a bed at Knapp Memorial Hospital in Weslaco. She does not move 
her arms or legs. She has a fever, a stiff neck and sore muscles and she doesn't 
under.stand why. 

Anna Isabel has polio. 

The disease that was a household horror until Dr. Jonas Salk and his miracle 
vaccine made it rare in the late 1950s, is making a deadly comeback in the Rio 
Grande Valley of Texas. 

strikes very yoitng 

It strikes the helpless and the innocent. It strikes the very young. 

Fourteen cases of pwlio have been reported in Cameron and Hidalgo counties 
which border Mexico. Three children have died so far this summer. 

"Polio is still around because of apathy," said Dr. .Tohn R. Copenhaver, health 
director for the two Texas counties and the man in the eye of the epidemic. 

Most of the 14 polio victims were under one year of age. The oldest was 3. 
Xone of the children was immunized against the disease. 

"The only way to overcome apathy is to force people to be immunized and to 
reward them if they do," Copenhaver said. "For instance, in order to travel or 
go to school or to receive welfare." 

POOR HIT HARDEST 

Polio can strike the rich or the poor. But in the Rio Grande Valley it has 
chosen the poor. Federal, state, and local health oflScials have started an immuni- 
zation campaign, dispensing 54,000 doses of oral polio vaccine in a four-county 
area. 

The epidemic prompted state legislators and health officials to consider legal 
methods to force parents to have their children immunized. 

"It certainly has been called to my attention," said Gus F. Mutscher, speaker 
of the Texas House of Representatives. "I think the best thing I could do at this 
time is to have a conference with the head of the Texas Education Agency and 
the Health Department." 



5071 

Many cities and school boards have required polio immunization. But Dr. J. E. 
Peavy, state health commissioner, said school programs would not help the 
current outbreak. 

"All but one of the children involved are under 2 years of age," Peavy said. 

UBGES EARLIER 8TABT 

Copenhaver said school programs do not attack the disease early enough in 
children. 

"We can't afford to wait until they are school age," he said. "They should be 
immunized in the first year of birth. It could be made mandatory for a birth 
certificate." 

Anna Isabel Trevino got her birth certificate and was struck down by polio 
in her second summer because she was not immunized. 

The Texas State Health Department now sends to county health departments 
lists of infants born in their areas. County oflScials then mail letters to all mothers, 
urging them to have their children inoculated. 

ADDRESS PROBLEM 

"But the address is so frequently wrong. It makes it awfully difficult." Copen- 
haver said. "We are now recommending that more information be given so chil- 
dren can be accurately followed up. 

"When they come into the clinic, they receive all the immunizations — diph- 
theria, whooping cough, tetanus, measles and smallpox — as many as two at one 
time." 

The treatment is free for those who cannot afford it. 

Despite the free clinics, door-to-door campaigns this summer and warning 
letters, polio continues to pop up, especially among the poor. 

"I don't think the financial status has anything to do with polio" except for 
the lack of money to pay for regular visits to a pediatrician, Copenhaver said. 
"The sanitary conditions or the closeness of individuals might be involved." 

CROWDED LIVING CONDITIONS 

Many Mexican-Americans in the Rio Grande Valley, including thousands of 
migrant farm workers, live crowded together with substandard sanitary con- 
ditions. 

The upper respiratory virus that causes polio can be inhaled through cough 
droplets from another person or transmitted directly by body filth found in all 
economic levels, Copenhaver said. 

He said surveys indicate the large migrant families are immunized better 
than nonmigrant families "because we put more emphasis on our migrant pro- 
gram here and there is emphasis up and down the migrant streams." 

Dr. Lipscomb. A number of patients were reported to have syphilis, 
and this was confirmed by serology. Fungus infections were common, 
particularly monilial vaginitis, stomatitis, and tinea corporis. 

Chest X-rays revealed the presence in at least three individuals of 
healed histoplasmosis, and at least two cases of previously undetected 
active pulmonary tuberculosis were discovered, one in a small infant 
and one in a middle-aged woman with a family of four children. 

Intestinal parasits were the rule. Under the microscope, pin worms, 
hook worms, round worms, and amoeba, often occurring in combina- 
tion in a single patient, and invariably occurring in several members of 
the same family, were seen. This points up Dr. Wheeler's account of 
the danger of close living quarters. Opportunity is great for infec- 
tious viral diseases to spread where adequate living quarters and 
sanitation are not the order of the day. 

We took eight drinking water samples from six "colonias" to deter- 
mine the condition of the drinking water. We also wanted to examine 
cultures from water used in the preparation of babies formulas. Of 



5072 

the six "colonia" water supplies tested, five were contaminated with 
fe-cal orofanisms. 

Senator Yarborough. In some of those instances, Doctor, did the 
water come from open irrigation ditches ? 

Dr. Lipscomb. I am told they were. In fact, I have a photograph of 
two contaminated water barrels that served four families, a total of 
23 people, which I would like to submit for the record. 

Senator ^Moxdale. By all means, let us include that at this point in 
the re<?ord. 

(The photograph referred to follows :) 




Dr. Lipscomb. Cramped living quarters combined with contaminated 
drinking water virtually assure the spread of any communicable or 
parasitic disease. 



5073 

2. TOXIC DISORDERS 

We had reason to suspect that a certain percentage of the migrant 
workers were exposed to toxic materials, notably pesticides used in the 
ag^'icultural industry. Acute pesticide poisoning is easily diagnosed. 
We saw evidence of this. 

On the other hand, many patients gave us a history of having been 
sprayed in fields shortly after a rain, at which time they suffered 
numbness and tingling of hands and feet. Many described a seasonal 
skin rash associated with the use of pesticides, especially organophos- 
phorous compounds, and chlorinated hydrocarbons. 

3. METABOLIC DISEASE 

Metabolic disease in this population included diabetes mellitus which 
occurs in high incidence in the Mexican-Amercan. We feel that the 
examination of urine alone, while relatively unsatisfactory as a diag- 
nostic procedure, uncovered 14 patients with previously undetected 
glycosuria. These patients must now be studied with glucose tolerance 
tests to confirm the presence of diabetes. 

Thyroid disease was common, and several cases of thyrotoxicosis 
were observed and at least two cases of myxedema (thyroid deficiency) 
were seen. We were impressed with the palpably enlarged thyroid 
glands. The McGanity report had earlier emphasized the presence of 
endemic goiter in the valley population, and this was again confirmed 
by clinical examination. It is not absolutely certain that the genesis for 
goiter is iodine deficiency alone. The possibility exists that the people 
of the valley may live on a diet that is itself goiterogenic. 

4. NUTRITIONAL DISEASE 

Nutritional disease was common and consisted primarily of protein 
malnutrition. Caloric malnutrition was not seen, and the pathetic 
wasting of prisoners of war and individuals in certain Far Eastern 
countries was absent. While we did not see people who were wasted 
and emaciated from simple starvation, we did see people who were 
suffering from an imbalance in the mixture of their foodstuffs so 
that they were eating carbohydrates, almost entirely to the exclusion 
of protein. 

Senator Mondale. Protein is expensive. 

Dr. Lipscomb. It costs money, sure. 

Senator Mondale. The cheap items are carbohydrates, and the ex- 
pensive things are proteins. So, when you find poor people, as you 
point out in your testimony, they are ashamed of their diet. Mothers 
know the difference, and they don't want you to know what kind of 
diet their children are eating, or that they missed breakfast or lunch. 
The truth is that they can't afford protein. 

Dr. Lipscomb. A family has to feel pride in what it does. We found 
people who said, "Sure, I give my family meat; they are eating well 
enough." But physical examinations of these people revealed other- 
wise. The Valley farm laborers are simply not getting enough protein. 
Dietary deficiencies were confirmed in the presence of extreme obesity 
due to a predominantly carbohydrate diet and associated changes in 



5074 

hair, skin, and nails; winging of scapulae in children, wasted muscle 
mass, and lassitude. These conditions were manifest throughout the 
population we saw. 

There were cases of ariboflavinosis, rickets, and pellagra. I belive 
the Rio Grande Valley is the only place, short of parts of Mississippi 
and some Indian reservations, where classic endemic nutritional dis- 
eases are still present in this country. 

Two nutritionists with us. Dr. Buford Nichols and Dr. Andrew 
McMahon, who made an earlier report to this committee, led us 
through the McAllen area saying, "I^et us now show you the aribo- 
flavinosis and rickets, and the bleeding of the swollen gums." It was 
regrettable that such "rare" diseases could be illustrated in this 
fashion, but that is the way we learned. 

5. NEOPLASTIC DISEASE 

Neoplastic disease was not frequent. It was not likely that a primary 
diagnosis of malignant disease was made in any person. Papanicolaou 
smears of cervical mucosa in 27 women failed to reveal malignant 
change, though bacterial and mycotic infections were common. 

Basal cell carcinomas of the skin were suggestive on several older 
individuals with heavy actinic exposure. We did examine three patients 
who were known to have malignant disease, one of whom had been 
treated intensively for lymphosarcoma and was in a terminal state. 
Prostatic carcinoma, resected carcinoma of the stomach, and a num- 
ber of breast malignancies which had been operated were seen. 

6. TRAUMATIC INJURIES 

Traumatic injuries were common. Head injuries, injuries to the 
cervical and lumbar spine, and thoracic injuries, resulting in fractured 
ribs, were seen or confirmed on X-ray. Dr. Wheeler, too, has referred 
to the high incidence of such injuries among migrant workers. It was 
remarkable how few persons had received what would be considered 
adequate followup care. 

7. CONGENITAL LESIONS 

Congenital lesions in the form of harelip, cleft palate, pilodinal 
cysts, and congenital cataracts were noted with some regularity. Two 
children had congenital cataracts, the etiology of which was not 
known. Four children with congenital strabismus, or crossing of the 
eyes, were seen. We were disturbed by the fact that one child with a 
cleft palate which had no^t been operated had experienced continuous 
feeding problems, including reflux of food and liquids through the 
nose, for 6 years of life. 

8. DEGENERATIVE DISEASE 

Degenerativ'e disease in older persons was common, including arte- 
riosclerotic heart disease, arteriosclerosis obliterans, and osteoarthritis, 
particularly of the hips, knees, and hands. Degenerative and actinic 



5075 

changes of the skin were often associated with small, basal-cell car- 
cinomas which we could document (by clinical examination, but which 
were not biopsied. 

9. DENTAL PROBLEMS 

Dental problems existed in every individual we examined. These 
included advanced dental caries, pyorrhea alveolaris, and other evi- 
dence of periodontal and root-canal disease. This was a most depres- 
sive finding. 

In our nutritional survey we mentioned the bleeding gums asso- 
ciated with scurvy. Because it is painful to chew harder foods, the 
person suffering from scurvy changes to a fairly soft diet. He begins 
to have erosion of 'the teeth and infection of his gums ; the end result 
being loss of teeth. We saw minimal filling of teeth and no dental 
prosthesis ( false teeth, bridges or braces) . 

Senator Mondale. You say you didn't find a single person who 
didn't have dental problems ? 

Dr. Lipscomb. That is right. 

Senator Mondale. Not a single person ? 

Dr. Lipscomb. You are correct. 

10. speech, hearing, vision 

Speech, hearing, and vision defects occurred frequently, especially 
in children. Congenital and acquired stra)bismus and cataracts were 
seen, and the survey team was impressed by the high incidence of 
hearing loss in children with chronic ear infections which had been 
untreated. 

It would seem, in America today, that it would be relatively simple 
to take a child with an earache to a physician. If the child's ear- 
drum is distended, retracted or red, if there is swelling on one side of 
the neck or a fever, penicillin or one of the broad spectrum antiobiotics 
will usually correct this problem in a short time. When treated early 
with antibiotics for otitis media, the child will generally recover with- 
out permanent damage. 

We made a point of having the medical students with us do hearing 
studies on every child with a perforated eardrum. We found a con- 
tinuing series of children with chronic untreated otitis media who 
had perforated eardrums. Their ears were still draining pus or had 
healed with perforations. Lack of treatment resulted in hearing loss. 

There is no question that the learning problem is greatly com- 
pounded when a child who has perhaps no choice where he sits in a 
classroom is not aware that he cannot hear or that he cannot see well 
enough. 

11. MENTAL, emotional, DEVELOPMENTAL, AND LEARNING DISORDERS 

Mental and emotional disorders were common, though difficult to as- 
sess during our brief examinations. Developmental, behavioral, and 
learning disorders were also difficult to diagnose. In some cases when 
we saw children far behind in school, we were able to document pre- 
viously unrecognized hearing loss or loss of visual acuity. 



5076 

GEXER.VL OBSERVATIONS 

From tlie combination of histories and physical examinations, 
coupled to laboratory results, X-ray studies and our overall clinical 
impression, the following general observations can be made: 

1. Malnutrition in adults, particularly the ajred, and in growing 
children and infants, was commonplace. This was manifest clinically 
by the presence of rhagades, chelosis, hyperkeratosis, night blindness, 
keratitis, blapliaritis, photophobia, and skin lesions resembling those 
of and exfoliative dermatitis. These observations confirm and extend 
earlier findings by the "Select Study of Human Nutrition" made in 
this same community 2 yeare earlier. Evidence of vitamin A, D, and 
B complex deficiencies were clinically obsem^ed. 

2. Chronic skin disease, including superficial fungal infections, im- 
petigo, and exfoliated dermatitis occurred in a number of patients. 
Many of the older individuals who had worked in the sun most of their 
lives had multi])le superficial skin tumors, several of which were 
thought clincially to be basal-cell carcinoma. We did not see lesions of 
squamous cell carcinoma. 

3. "We found a high incidence of visual and hearing loss, particu- 
larly in the aged and in school aged children. Growing evidence sug- 
gests that hearing loss in children, arising from untreated or inade- 
quately treated otitis media, may serve as a "tracer" disease which re- 
flects inadequacy of health care. For this reason, the National Science 
Foundation has inaugurated a long-term study of hearing loss. 

4. Intestinal parasitism was extremely common and had, in most in- 
stances, never been treated, except with home remedies by "curanderos." 

5. Metabolic disease, including diabetes mellitus and thyroid disease, 
was frequent. We were impressed by the number of palpably enlarged 
thyroids representing endemic goiter. 

6. Invariably, mothers suffered from the "multiple pregnancy syn- 
drome," which includes chronic anemia, weakness, and in many cases, 
unrepaired cervical lacerations. This is an empiric syndrome which is 
diagnosed retrospectively in a mother experiencing multiple births 
over a short span of time. Although the "multiple pregnancy syn- 
drome" is largely an intuitive diagnosis, it was commented upon re- 
peatedly by the examining physicians. 

7. One of the most disturbing aspects of our survey was the neglect 
of dental hygiene and proper oral care. Furthermore, in the presence 
of this destruction of teeth and gums, there was little evidence of re- 
pair of carious teeth and prostheses were not in use. Pyorrhea al- 
veolaris was common, 

8. We saw uncorrected congenital deformities which would have re- 
sponded well to appropriate surgical therapy. 

9. Rehabilitation of pereons with nerve injuries, fractures, and 
strokes leading to hemiplegia and hemiparesis was unknown. Not one 
single individual with a residual impairment of gait or motor func- 
tion had enjoyed the benefits of rehabilitative care, aside from that 
associated with return to work at a lower level of productivity. 

10. We saw patients with a history of seizures. During our clinic 
visit, one young man of 16 had a grand mal seizure which started as a 
Jacksonian march, suggesting localization, but no prior neurological 
workup had been performed. 



5077 

11. Multiple back deformities were seen, including scoliosis and 
kyphosis, occasionally due to injury, but in a number of cases no ex- 
planation was forthcoming as to the cause. Undiagnosed back, hip, and 
lower-extremity pain was a common sympton in the young, but was 
difficult to document on physical examination. Symptomatioally, this 
pain resembled that of degenerative osteoarthritis, usually found in 
older people. 

12. Active pulmonary tuberculosis was revealed by X-ray, as well as 
sarcoidosis, a pulmonary disease of uncertain etiology. 

13. Degenerative diseases of the heart and great vessels was wide- 
spread, as was hypertension. 

14. Anemia was not a common finding in these individuals. When it 
was observed, it usually could be ascribed to a combination of iron 
deficiency, protein malnutrition, and intestinal parasitism. The "mul- 
tiple pregnancy syndrome" also may have contributed to some of the 
anemia we observed. 

In this recounting, it is difficult to convey the overall impression of 
our group in an objective fashion. Four consecutive days of an un- 
ceasing parade of illness, deformity, disability, and human suffering 
exerted a profound and demoralizing effect upon us. While we had 
reason to question the wisdom of having brought students with us, the 
response to this experience was as pronounced in older physicians 
as in young medical students. 

The migrant workers whom we examined represent a marginal 
group which is, for the most part, beyond the influence of American 
health care. In a nation where levels of specialty care in medicine have 
achieved laudable heights, this group has not yet found its way to our 
most rudimentaiy facilities. Such smiple necessities as glasses, false 
teeth, braces, hearing aids, dental repair, rehabilitation, repair of con- 
genital deformities, maintenance of simple hygiene, and repair of 
cervical lacerations following childbirth, this population — uniquely — 
seems to have never attained. The specialties of plastic surgery, ob- 
stetrics and gynecology, pediatrics, surgical ophthalmology, and 
otorhinolaryngology have no meaning to the poor, for they have 
never had access to this level of professional treatment. 

The health survey team would wish to stress once more the relative 
ease with which we were able to document the presence of disease, 
and the absolute impossibility of ascribing cause to these conditions. 
This is an important distinction, for if we are to correct such condi- 
tions, we must know and understand where the defect lies. 

If medical and dental care is too expensive, we need to know of this. 
If sociocultural barriers exist, we need to learn to work within these 
limits. If religious ethic prevents planned parenthood, we need to find 
ways to reasonably approach such strictures. If there are injustices and 
cruelties which prevent the acquisition of food, transportation to and 
from health facilities, and entry into hospitals, we need to take steps 
to remove these barriers. 

Of one fact we have become convinced. If we make significant ad- 
vances in the delivery of health care to the poor and do not change the 
social environment in which they live, including food, clothing, hous- 
ing, education and sanitation, we will have done little to change the 
fundamental situation. Because the major causes of these manifold 
social ills are largely economic in nature, any effort we make must be 



5078 

tempered with an understanding of the deficiencies of our entire 
social structure, which tends to punish, selectively, the poor of our 
society. 

If this committee addresses itself only to medical care problems, 
specifically the doctor-patient relationship, and fails to grasp the com- 
plexity of the deficiency in the total life style of this population, then 
our myopic attempts to achieve good health care will fail. 

Senator YARBORoroii. Doctor, will you yield a moment at this point ? 
Among these other problems, of course, has been the language barrier. 
AMien I introduced in January of 1967 a bilingual education bill. I was 
amazed to find that that was the first bilingiuil education bill ever 
introduced in either branch of the Congress. We passed it that year. 
Tliere again the law is on the books, but we have had a constant 
effort by all administrations in power since then to pull down the 
moneys appropriated. "We finally have authorization this year of $30 
million. For a year wc could not get any appropriation, then the Bu- 
reau of the Budget and administration recommended $5 million and 
then $10 million. It has been tokenism. 

Last year we got that appropriation up to $21%. million. This year 
we brought it up, the administration recommended $21% million. We 
got it up to $25 million in the Appropriations Committee and $30 mil- 
lion on the floor. 

This is a question that has been previously raised here by Dr. 
Wheeler, why isn't something done about this? This committee, with 
its aid on the floor, passed this summer these matters by unanimous 
vote of the Senate. But when we get down to the administrators, 
strangely the Office of Education gave no help, they opposed this 
bilingual educational bill. The Bureau of the Budget cuts back con- 
stantly on health and education, and last year in questioning them I 
found that there is not a single trained health professional or trained 
educational professional in the whole Bureau of the Budget with 178 
hearing examiners passing on the budget of the United States. 

So. we have problems there. The office of the Bureau of the Budget 
is not health and education-oriented. It is not only not health and edu- 
cation-oriented, but out of the professionals covering all the depart- 
ments and branches of the Government, they had as of last year not 
hired one health or educational professional. 

Dr. Lipscomb. After examining a child who had a 60 percent hear- 
ing loss in one ear and 40 in the other, one of our medical students 
said, "If you are born poor in America, that is bad. If you are dark 
skinned and speak another language, that is even worse. If you are a 
migrant and don't have a place to call home, that is a greater tragedy. 
And, if you are sick, blind, or hard of hearing too, there is no way you 
will ever become part of life in America today." 

The poor do not envision a place for themselves in the affluence that 
surrounds them. It is left to us to put up the grubstake to get them 
started. Our first task is to help them attain good healh and adequate 
living conditions — the barest needs of all human beings. 

In an attempt to achieve objectivity in this report, charges will be 
linked to suggestions for change. I believe that there is probably no 
more dedicated a group of people in the Ignited States than those who 
devote their life to the care of the sick. I say this as a personal bias. 
They work longer hours, and they are dedicated, these 200,000 physi- 



5079 

cians. They give, to the best of their knowledge, good care to the 
patients whom they see. We now know beyond any doubt, however, 
that there are large numbers of Americans whom physicians never 
see and can never really know about until they become visible, as did 
the sick and injured in Mc Allen. 

I feel that physicians and other health providers are individually 
responsible for a form of apathy and indifference which is generated 
by long association with illness. Each physician must retain his sensi- 
tivity to illness and its effect on the community as a whole. He must 
be willing to stand up and call attention to urgent local health needs. 
It requires courage and ingenuity to refuse to tolerate these conditions. 
The physician and his colleagues must search for ways to more effec- 
tively participate in community health programs. 

Furthermore, it must be said that in every poor community I have 
visited in the past 2 years, the physician's primary or follow-on fee 
constitutes the most important barrier, in the minds of the poor, to 
seeking early medical help. 

Senator Mondale. In other words, the poor are afraid they will 
have to pay a fee, which they will , so they stay away ? 

Dr. Lipscomb. This is the reason I again say that entry into our 
health care system is the initial hurdle, and we must find a way to 
help them overcome it. 

Throughout county. State, and national medical associations, physi- 
cians, both black and white, are responsible for failing to exert leader- 
ship in the development of health care programs which would bring 
resolution to these problems at a local level. 

Within the borders of Texas and California we were witness to a 
large unimmunized population. There is a constant influx of bacterial, 
viral, and parasitis diseases to the United States. 

Senator Mondale. Would you say that the desperately poor people 
that regularly cross our borders from Mexico into the United States 
are a major factor in defining the health problems of this area ? 

Dr. Lipscomb. I personally believe this to be true. It is my under- 
standing that two of the contacts for the recognized cases of polio in 
the valley were associated with polio exposure across the border in 
Reynosa. 

Senator Mondale. We have tried in every possible way we could to 
get the attention of the Federal Government concerning the enormous 
significance of the unrestricted border crossings. It affects wages, it 
affects the opportunity and ability for union or community organiza- 
tion, it affects housing, it affects education. Indeed, perhaps the single 
most important source of the migrant stream is the border crossing 
between Mexico and Texas and California and all its attendant prob- 
lems. There is absolutely no interest in this Government to do any- 
thing to correct the situation. 

They have attacked the marihuana problem, but there are human 
problems that you have just described which are undoubtedly the worst 
in America today, and we have received no interest at all from the 
appropriate executive branches of Government. I went down there, 
myself, to a border crossing point at 5 in the morning. I nearly 
got arrested just because I was so interested in seeing what was really 
happening. 



5080 

I found that over 40 percent of the people crossing the border, and 
there were hundreds of them, produced birth certificates which in my 
opinion were probabl}^ phony, at least many of them were phony. Yet 
in hearings during which I asked the appropriate Federal agencies 
to look into this fact, I never got a sufficient answer. 

Yet this is a walking poverty program that is producing poverty by 
the hundreds of thousands. This is possibly why you have a large 
Florida migrant population that is getting Voi-se off, not better, l^- 
cause people are so desperate in southern Texas that they are moving 
to Florida. They also move to California. 

I don't see how we can beat the farmworkers problem until at least 
there is some rational policy at that border, because there is an un- 
limited supply of tragically poor, unskilled, impoverished and as you 
point out, unhealthy people in Mexico seeking some better life in this 
Nation. And I want to make it absolutely clear that I have nothing 
against the poor people of Mexico. Maybe we should have a national 
policy like we do witli Cuba, to take all their poor and their welfare 
recipients. Maybe we should. 

But let us do it right if we are going to do it. Right now it is the 
poor migrant, the poor Mexican- American who is paying the price, 
this awful price, along our southern borders where we have a de- 
pression economy. It is still "Grapes of Wrath." It is still "Harvest 
of Shame." 

The implication you put on this influx is that it is a walking source 
of poor health for America. If you can get the attention of the appro- 
priate agencies, you are better tlian I am. 

Dr. Lipscomb. Certainly, preventive measures and immunization are 
crucial issues in Hidalgo and Starr Counties. The polio epidemic 
has focused attention on the need for a protective effort by county and 
State health departments, particularly along the border. 

I feel that elected officials, specifically county judges sitting on com- 
missioners' courts or in other vital administrative positions, control 
the solicitation of State and Federal funds, and, more importantly, 
how these moneys are spent in their counties. I have been in several 
rural areas where the county judge virtually rules a satrapy. He regu- 
lates the flow of monev and its distribution, particularly as it relates 
to welfare, road building, and funding for beds in State hospitals. 
This man holds the key in any preparations for local programs. 

When legislation is passed in Washington, something has to hap- 
pen at a local level. The moral responsibility and sense of obligation 
the county judge feels can influence how local and Federal funds are 
reallocated and distributed in his community. 

Senator Saxbe. Right there I think you have put your finger on the 
trouble we have in Washington. One thing we learn from what Sen- 
ator Yarborough said is that you can't cure these problems by money 
alone, because we have $15 million a year going into this health care 
in these migrant labor camps and yet we have this situation of no 
medical care or very little. 

I have the feeling that if we did have unlimited funds without local 
participation, we still could not cure the problem.' The indifference at 
the local level, and this is true of every State where we have these 
migrants — the indifference is so great that if we try to do it from 
Washington without the cooperation at the local level, we are going to 



5081 

spend millions and millions of dollars without accomplishing what we 
are trying to do. 

The local judge you talk about in Mississippi and Alabama is in- 
terested in getting that man to leave to come to Washington, to come 
to New York, to come anyplace else but his county, because he is no 
longer an asset. His work is no longer needed. He is unskilled, he 
can^ run a tractor, his health is poor, maybe he is old. 

So, anything that would make him healthier there and keep him 
there, they are not interested in. I know there are compassionate peo- 
ple, but compassion is lacking in most of these situations. I know from 
my experience in Ohio many of the growers are interested in having 
that man available. In fact, they will invite him in, knowing they will 
need only half of what are recruited, so that there will be a surplus of 
labor when he needs them. 

"WHien that labor is over, he is indifferent to what happens. Now 
unless local people, and this is true of your physiicians that you talk 
about — unless the medical association, unless these people at the local 
level are interested in solving this problem, it is like trying to push 
a truck up the hill with a tow rope when you just push money in from 
Washington without any cooperation or interest at the local level. 

Senator Mondale. Would you yield there ? 

Senator Saxbe. Certainly. 

Senator Mondale. I think that Senator Saxbe is right if we do it 
the way we are doing it now. Every time we want to help the migrants, 
the first thing we do is hire a bunch of white middle-class people, 
and we give them the money. But, the white middle-class people lack 
the interest and the commitment to do the job. At least our zero 
record of progress indicates such. 

This is what we saw in that migrant health program in McAllen, 
Tex., which is the target area you are talking about. Dr. Casso has 
treated more people on his own free time than has that migrant 
health program. We have to get over this paternalism and start fun- 
neling money into the hands of those who need the help, and they 
will do a lot better job of getting help than we can do for them. 

Now I am absolutely convinced that in that migrant health pro- 
gram, if it were run by the migrants themselves, they would have 
spread that money much further, and far more efficiently. They would 
have had paraprofessionals, they would have probably hired return- 
ing medical corpsmen, they would have had an Outreach program 
and at least they would have been able to speak Spanish. And most of 
these health problems you are talking about are not difficult, they are 
not expensive to resolve. It is a question of the concern of the people 
in charge of the programs, and the concern of Outreach workers to 
make the programs work. 

Dr. Lipscomb. At least 90 percent of the diseases which we saw 
are treatable. 

Senator Mondale. It is an inexpensive program, but all of our 
programs paternalistically assume a concern by people who are not 
in the target population. So long as we proceed in that way as we 
have seen with the Indians, as we have seen with the migrants, as 
we have seen with any other powerless population in America, they 
are not going to get the help. 



5082 

I think that is fundamental to defining the problem and finding 
solutions. Put the funds in the hands of those who need the help. 
They will do fairly well. There is one thing we have been unwilling 
to do; let them have power over tlieir own lives. Paternalism is not 
working, and won't work. 

Senator Saxbe. I don't go all the way with that, because I know 
and you know from the GEO experience that when you are dealing 
with people who are in many cases children, because they lack educa- 
tional opportunities or they have been dogged by poor nutrition, they 
have extreme difficulty in trying to run a business or.ofanization, which 
is Avhat is required. 

They make mistakes, we are critical. This has happened in our model 
cities. They wind up in jurisdictional fights and jealousies. To an 
extent, yes, we can do this. "We can channel the money through the 
subjects, but if we think that we are going to get good business prac- 
tices and we are going to get more for our money, I seriously ques- 
tion whether that is going to be forthcoming. 

The program needs a combination of these things. The people don't 
always operate for their own good. They don't always do the things 
that are the best business practices. There are a great many weaknesses 
that exist in all levels of our populations. So when they do go wrong, 
everybody points a finger and says, "I told you so, they are not in- 
terested in bettering themselves. A few take advantage of it," and so on. 

We have heard it all on the model cities and some of these other 
ambitious poverty programs. A few benefit, a great many don't. So, 
there is no simple solution. 

I don't believe that we can tell people that everything would be 
rosy if we just funnel it through these people. 

Senator Mondale. I am sure this is not the morning for a great 
debate, but I think there is enomious strength in the poor, I think 
most of them are a lot brighter than we believe. Most of them are far 
more compassionate and, surprisingly much more patriotic. They very 
much want to be a part of this country. They know about poor health. 
They don't have to be brainwashed to know about hunger. 

Our programs and systems are too often conceived and almost al- 
ways operated by those who are aloof from the need, and they don't 
work. Tliis includes the model cities program. That is not an example 
of local control. There are so many Federal, and State, and local strings 
on that model cities program that I think one of the reasons for the 
frustration is that a community elects an advisory board and once 
they are empaneled, they find they don't have anj power at all. They 
are token leaders. All they are asked to do is deliver bad news to the 
folks. 

I am sure, and I hope Dr. Casso will comment on this when he 
testifies, that if the health program were directed by an elected board 
of migrants from the four-county area in the Rio Grande Valley where 
the migrant health program presently operates, the delivery of serv- 
ices, the effectiveness of Outreach, the sensitivity of the program would 
be enormously improved per dollar over what we have today. 

You might comment on this, Dr. Casso. This is the doctor who lives 
in the middle of all of this. 

Dr. Casso. In my opinion that is correct, Senator. It seems like the 
migrant health funds are very limited, to begin with, in my area. It 



5083 

amounts to about $9.96 per migrant per year. When we compare that 
with the national average of about $250 per person for health care, 
that is a tremendous difference. 

Now when you funnel these limited funds through the hierarchies 
of public health and so on, by the time this money trickles down to 
the migrant, you find that it is a very, ve^-^^ small amount that actually 
gets to him in the form of health care services. 

Senator Mondale. As a matter of fact, it takes all the genius that 
we have to know how to get a dime out of the dollar down there. 

Dr. Casso. That's right. 

Senator Mondale. By the time it works its way down the bureau- 
cratic chute, there is little left for the people that are supposed to 
benefit. 

Senator Yarborough. Dr. Lipscomb, I saw a ray of hope in Janu- 
ary for Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, the two Lower Rio Grande 
Valleys of Texas out of which 10 percent of all the migrant farmwork- 
ers of Texas come, because in the primaries this year there were 
nominated persons of Mexican-American extraction who ran on plat- 
forms of concern for the poor. 

For the first time in the history of those counties county judges will 
be inaugurated in Cameron and Hidalgo Counties of Mexican- Ameri- 
can extraction. I think there will be some changes in that local food 
distribution and more active concern there. 

You talk about people crossing the border. I assume that refers to 
the "green carders" more than anything else, the green card by 
which a man can take that card and go as far north as Dallas and 
Kansas City without becoming a regular resident of the United States. 
It has a depressing effect on wages as far north as Kansas City and 
St. Louis. 

Now there are past examples of the cooperative effort with the 
Mexican Government to eradicate disease. It can be done. I refer to 
the hoof-and-mouth program and the screw-worm eradication pro- 
gram, but they both deal with diseases of livestock. 

NoAv what we need is that same concern for human beings that we 
have shown for the health of livestock, in the screw-worm eradication 
program and hoof-and-mouth disease eradication program. 

We know we did have cooperative agreements with Mexico and we 
have hoof-and-mouth disease eliminated. You have to be on guard. The 
screw-worm incidence has been reduced to very minimal. There is a 
constant guard to keep that from breaking out. 

This shows it can be done with Mexico. 

Dr. Lipscomb. It has been said that our racehorses, dogs, and cats 
receive more attention than is given to the poor of the valley. 

It is indeed difficult to balance the administration of Federal funds 
with the desire of the poor to have a voice in their program. There 
is no easy answer, but it seems to me that any time a white person 
dealing with the blacks or an Anglo dealing with Mexican Americans 
comes in and says, "We will help you do this," there must be a self- 
limiting factor in which he also says, "At the end of a certain period, 
I will get out and you will run it yourself." 

I believe that hospitals, operating as nonprofit, tax-exempt corpora- 
tions, both public and private, have failed to exercise innovation and 
courage in the development of community programs which would 



5084 

reach out to the poor and ahnost poor, and eliminate such deterrents 
as the means test. 

Moreover, tlie Federal Government, through well-intentioned leg- 
islation, has in some cases created absolute barriers to better health 
care. A recent case in point involves Medicare legislation which re- 
quires that registered nurses be on duty on all shifts in hospitals re- 
ceiving Medicare funds. This has recently resulted in the closing of 
at least six hospitals serving the Rio Grande Vallev, which, while 
giving limited health care, nevertheless provided a critical service for 
the migrant worker and his family. In addition, medicare legislation 
does not specifically pay for immunization for migrant workers. As 
a consequence, we are now reaping the harvest of this shortsightedness 
in our current polio epidemic. 

Many corporations in our country have placed self-interest too 
far above community concern and have failed to exert that leader- 
ship which their economic strength allows. For example, insurance 
carriers have set patterns for health care compensation which have 
encouraged over-utilization of hos])itals, and subsequently increased 
the initial cost of insurance premiums. Medical insurance coverage 
is prohibitive for the poor and the almost-poor as well. 

The renewed attempts of the valley migrants to unionize may pro- 
vide them the strength to bargain collectively to force such issues as 
fair wages, decent living conditions, and adequate health care insur- 
ance. The recent pressures to develop a form of national health in- 
surance and group, prepaid health coverage may provide one direct — 
and overdue — remedy for these injustices. I would hope to see an en- 
lightened national health insurance program come before Congress and 
be acted upon. 

Senator Saxbe. Aren't you there increasing the demand without 
increasing the ability to serve that demand? 

Dr. Lipscomb. It is cheaper in time, life, human suffering, and 
money to prevent disease. I believe that we need to devise and oper- 
ate new health care centers which not only provide crisis-oriented 
emergency care for the critically ill, but also make preventive treat- 
ment feasible for the well, worried well, and early sick. 

Senator Saxbe. What I mean is 

Dr. Lipscomb. I see your point. You are wondering, if we make it 
easier for them to enter the present system but do not change the 
whole structure of health care delivery in America, then will we have 
flooded an already inadequate system. 

"What is the crisis in American health care ? We do not have enougli 
doctors, enough nurses, enough dentists, enough hospitals, or enough 
money. Dr. Peter Warter, an official of a major corporation, noted 
that there is a ratio of 200,000 physicians to 200,000,000 people in this 
country, and that $63 billion per year is spent on health care. He ob- 
served that the same physician-to-populace ratio exists in a model 
health care scheme on the West Coast. However, this prepaid medi- 
cal coverage gives across the board minimal care for $100 per per- 
son, per year. 

Senator Saxbe. Are you referring to the Kaiser program ? 

Dr. Lipsc oiub. Yes, sir. 

Senator Saxbe. Isn't that about $400 a year ? 



I 



5085 

Dr. Lipscomb. Now the recent figures suggest that the average cost 
per individual for group prepaid health care is $100 to $200 annually 
for each of the 2 million participants. The cost of this health care 
package, if it were extrapolated to our whole population, would come 
to approximately $20 billion per year, which is a third of what we are 
spending for health care. 

Perhaps, as Dr. '\'VnTieeler has said, the problem is not so much the 
shortage of doctors, personnel, and facilities, but the unequal distribu- 
tion of the population and capital in our country. 

Certainly every medical school in this Nation must plan to increase 
the number of its students. We must begin to train paramedical per- 
sonnel and physician assistants. Even then, the impact of these mea- 
sures would not be felt for 10 or 15 years. 

In a wholly different vein, and, perhaps, to move the cynic, a prag- 
matic approach to the nutritional and health problems of the poor 
may have greater import than an appeal to altruistic sentiments. 

What we are doing to the poor in America today is simply bad 
business. 

We are losing valuable man-hours of productive labor by allowing 
this human wastage to continue. This is supported by a recent studv 
(Correa and Cummins, Am. J. Clin. Nutrition ; 23 :560-565, May 1970) 
which demonstrates that increased caloric consumption accounted 
for 5 percent of the growth of the national product in nine Latin 
American co^^nt^ies — a contribution nearly as great as their educa- 
tional programs. We have failed to conduct the business of the Nation 
in a businesslike fashion. 

The findings described here are not limited to the Rio Grande Valley, 
to the Mexican-Americans, or to the migrant workers. Disease of this 
magnitude can be seen in the ghettos of American cities, and in rural 
areas throughout the Nation. I would state emphatically that enoufifh 
evidence is now at hand for us to roll up our sleeves and get to work. 

fApplause.] 

Senator Mondale. Thank you, Doctor, for a remarkable statement. 
You have made a most important contribution. 

Senator Yarborough. If a person knew nothing about Mexican 
Americans except the statement here of their terrible health condi- 
tions and the poverty and malnutrition, they would not see a picture 
of the whole man. I have traveled among them for 18 years. They are 
wonderful people, as you have found. They are patriotic people. 

They know their ills and thiey know that they are at the bottom 
of the totem pole in America among all of the ethnic groups. 

Now the tragic thing about this is that financially the outlook for 
the migrants seem to be worse this year as the families are coming 
back to Texas and went to places they formerly worked and now have 
foimd there has been mechanization and the jobs in the field that were 
formerly there are not open. They formerly would go north and work 
in the harvest where they picked cherries in Michigan or harvested 
asparagus in Illinois or work in vegetable fields around the great cities 
in the North or in the sugar beet fields of Michigan and they would 
come back with enough money to pull them through the winter. 

Now they are coming back with their jobs gone and the outlook 
economically looks even worse. That is a problem that needs to be 
considered, too. 

36-513 O— 71— Pt. 8-A 8 



5086 

In the interest of time I will forgo questions or further comments. 
I did have some. I want to thank you for this g:reat contribution you 
have made. As a fellow Texan I honor you for the study you have 
made and for the report you have made to the Nation. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator Mondale. Thank you, Senator Yarborough. 

Senator Saxbe ? 

Senator Saxbe. This is general, but I know you have found some 
model migrant camps. We have some in Ohio where they have really 
made a good effort. "We have some bad ones, too. But did you see a 
markedly different result where they did have adequate quarters and 
sanitation — I am talking about from the medical standpoint now. 

Dr. Lipscomb. I asked Dr. Wheeler if he could answer, and he said 
he didn't see any. 

Senator Saxbe. I visited one personally in Florida and they had 
nice quarters and a community house. They had seemingly regular 
employment there, however. That is, they had settled in there. From 
an outward observation, without any medical records, they seemed to 
be much better off. I just wondered if you had visited any of these. 

Dr. Lipscomb. I did not visit any of them myself. It intuitively seems 
to me that they would be better. Someone might say, "You don't really 
know what helps the poor until you make a study." Let us make our 
next study a practical effort by setting up better ways to live. 

Senator Saxbe. I will take you to one facility in Ohio which will 
give you a good observation of what can be done. It is due primarily 
to local interest. 

Dr. Lipscomb. We know the figures of immunization, sanitation, 
elimination of tapeworms, pinworms, and hookworms are good 
figures to adopt in the elimination of malnutrition and disease. The 
models do exist. Now let us implement them. 

Senator Mondale. Dr. Lipscomb, I have only one question because 
it is now noon and we want to hear from the other witnesses. I gather 
from your testimony that while there was some concern shown toward 
mental health problems, that the field surveys here were principally 
restricted to the physical health problems. We have had witnesses be- 
fore us. Dr. Coles from Harvard and others, who have given their 
opinion that it is almost impossible for a migrant child to grow up 
mentally healthy — that the rootlessness, the lack of a place to call their 
own, the constant movement, the rejection, the dullness and the bore- 
dom of work, the insults, the feeling of not being wanted, the total 
powerlessness to do anything about one's plight, the second-rate sys- 
tems of education, the reality of grown boys sitting in a second-grade 
class, and other such insults produce a child with profound mental 
health problems. They say that these problems make it virtually im- 
possible for such children to go through the system and come out 
mentally or physically healthy. 

I think this is a dimension — the mental health problem — that should 
not be ignored. It is more difficult to quantify, but maybe its damage 
is even worse in some respects, if that is possible, than the physical 
problems to which you make reference. 

Dr. Lipscomb. I think tliat a person who is poor, who is dark- 
skinned, who speaks another language, who is rootless, who is hungry, 
who may be sick, in addition, with iron deficiency anemia, subminimal 



5087 

diseases, and who still survives in our society as these people have done, 
is remarkable. I am constantly amazed that the poor of our Nation 
have been able to cope and survive. In spite of these obstacles, they 
have kept their resilience, culture, language, music, and ethos. 

Senator Saxbe. Isn't that the history of all of us at one time in 
our history, though ? 

Dr. Lipscomb. Yes. 

Senator Saxbe. I mean, most of us have come from a peonage or 
feudal system in Europe. 

Dr. Lipscomb. Sure. 

Senator Saxbe. We have survived because man is pretty tough. 

Dr. Lipscomb. Yet in the Kio Grande Valley, these people are still 
living in a feudal system, and are suffering in the 20th century. 

Senator Saxbe. Eighty percent of the world population survives as 
we have seen these people in the migrant camps sur^dve. This is the 
tragedy of our civilization. 

Senator Yarborough- Mr. Chairman, I have one other comment. 

Dr. Lipscomb, I agree with you if we just took a pragmatic ap- 
proach, if we took a cold materialistic approach and didn't consider 
matters of humanitarianism or justice or anything else, just a cold 
dollars and cents approach, we would help this situation. It is better 
business, better in dollars and cents, better for the economic strength 
of the Nation. 

It is wholly unintelligent to respond to this as we have, in my 
opinion. Even if we took no humanitarian attitude at all, it would 
pay this Nation to do this. 

Dr. Lipscomb. The paper comes from the American Journal of 
Clinical Nutrition, and it outlines the economic advantages of pro- 
viding food for hungry peoples. 

Senator Yarborough. I ask that be included in this testimony. Also, 
because of the interruptions, I will order printed in the hearing record 
at this point your full statement together with documents and mate- 
rials that you have appended to it. 

Senator Mondale. Without objection, that will be included. 

(The material referred to follows :) 

Ppiepared Statement of Harry S. Lipscomb, M.D., Director of the Institute 
FOR Heialth Services Research, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, 
Tex. 

Senator Mondale, distinguished members of the Subcommittee, I am Harry S. 
Lipscomb, M.D. I am Director of the Institute for Health Services Research, 
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, and member of the Citizens Board 
of Inquiry into Health Care Services. 

You have requested that we tell you of the findings of a group of physicians 
who recently surveyed the health conditions of migrant and seasonal farm- 
workers in South Texas. 

I do so with reluctance, because I am ashamed, as an American, of what we 
sav\', and concerned, as a physician, that my colleagues and I have failed to act 
as leaders in the face of demonstrated need, to structure the delivery of our serv- 
ices so as to reach every man, woman, and child in our Nation. Dr. Wheeler has 
given a broad overview of what our team saw in Texas and Florida. I will now 
docmnent our findings in the Rio Grande Valley. 

From March 3rd through March 8th of this year, our health team examined 
patients in clinics and "barrios" of Hidalgo and Starr Counties, Texas. Histories 
and physical examinations were performed on 1400 individuals, the majority 
of whom were Mexican-Americans living in and around the city of McAllen, 
Texas. Our health team, which consisted of fifteen physicians, ten medical stu- 



5088 

dents, four technicians, and two nurses, saw patients from early morning until 
midnight for four consecutive days. On a limited number, we performed blood 
counts, urinalyses, chest X-rays, i>elvic examinations, and stool cultures. Addi- 
tionally, we collected drinking water from 8 "barrios" for bacteriological exam- 
ination. 

It had been our intention to examine 50 families in great depth, but were con- 
fronted on March 4th by over 900 i)eople lining the streets around the small 
clinic in which we worked. We had intended to document, but not treat illness. 
Within the first hour it became clear that the i^eople had come for treatment, and 
their manifest need was so overwhelming that we hastily arranged with a 
neighl)0ring pharmacy to provide medications and vitamins. In four days we 
prescribed and administered in excess of $6,000 worth of drugs, which were sub- 
sequently paid for by the Field Foundation. 

The region which we chose was selected in part because of an expressed need 
of the community and because of an earlier well-documented nutritional study, 
in the same region, reported to the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human 
Needs of the U.S. Senate (90th Cong., 2nd Sess., and 91st Cong., First Sess. : 
"Nutrition and Human Needs," part 3, the National Nutrition Survey, pp. 880- 
922). 

Two years later, 15 months after the inauguration of the Surplus Commodities 
program, one year after the passage of the Migratory Health Act, little has 
changed. Disease and malnutrition and human suffering continue. This in the 
face of over $6 million in farm subsidies, significant civic improvements, new 
highways and roads, and new hospital construction assisted by Hill-Burton 
funding. 

In short, the Mexican-American is still a disenfranchised person. 

This report will simply describe what we were able to document from our 
clinical impressions, X-rays, and other supporting laboratory data. It would be 
impossible to identify a .specific cause for many of the conditions : We will de- 
scribe a child with a cleft palate which has not been surgically repaired, a 
patient who needs glasses and has not gotten them, a mother with cervical in- 
fection who has not been treated, or a person who has not had adequate dental 
care, which all constitute documentable evidence of disease. On the other hand, 
that the.se conditions have occurred, or have not been remedied may be ascribed 
to ignorance, to lack of awareness, to lack of availability of services, or to 
economic barriers which cannot be identified, in all cases, with certainty. We 
simply cannot link disease to the reason for the disease except in a few isolated 
instances. We would like to say that all the malnutrition which we saw was due 
to an inadequate commodity program in Hidalgo County, or that poor dental 
care was due to a limited number of dentists and the high initial cost for care, 
but I do not believe that a survey of this sort can be so used. For every case of 
health hardship we saw involving lack of physicians or inadequate funds or 
improper food, we saw a balance of patients who, for sociocultural reasons or 
lack of educated health "awarene^ss," failed to seek care. Perhaps in the culture 
of poverty, failure to seek reflects the hopelessness of poverty, the apathetic 
despair of a culture which has done without for so long that even the aspiration 
for care is lost. This very apathy and despair which has characterized every 
poor community I have visited is, unfortunately, used as evidence that the poor 
will not avail themselves of our services if they are provided. I believe the over- 
whelming turnout of the people of the Valley to our accessible clinic gives the 
lie to this popular misconception. These people are hungry for care. They are 
dying for want of it. 

In analyzing the results of our study, we have been able to classify the con- 
ditions which we saw into the following categories. 

1. Infectious disease : 

a. bacterial 

b. viral 

c. spirochaetal 

d. fungal 

e. parasitic 

2. Toxic disorders 

3. Metabolic disease 

4. Nutritional disease 

5. Neoplastic di.sease : 

a. benign 

b. malignant 



5089 

6. Traumatic injury 

7. Congenital disease 

8. Degenerative disease 

9. Dental disease 

10. Speech, hearing, and vision defects 

11. Mental, emotional, developmental and learning disorders 

1. INFECTIOUS DISEASE 

The bacterial infections which we observed included otitis media, bronchitis, 
laryngotracheobronchitis in children, conjunctivitis, uveitis, acute and chronic 
follicular tonsillitis, pyelonephritis, cervicits, urethritis, and imi>etigo. Associ- 
ated inflammatory conditions, perhaps of non-bacterial origin, included chole- 
cystitis, gastritis, and esophagitis. In regard to hygiene, we found nursing 
mothers with mastitis, and on two occasions we examined bottles of milk for 
infants, which were contaminated and the milk soured. Viral diseases were com- 
mon and many children and entire families were suffering from upper respira- 
tory infections. A number of communicable childhood diseases were seen includ- 
ing rubella. It is of some significance that shortly after we left, an epidemic of 
poliomylitis occured in the Valley resulting in three deaths. This is the only 
poliomyelitis reported in the United States in 1970. If it is reasoned that the 
open border into Mexico is an open seeding source, then our very protection lies 
in immunization. In this population we have failed to provide this protection. 
A number of patients were reported to have syphilis and this was confirmed by 
serology. Fungous infections were common, particularly monilial vaginitis, 
stomatitis, and tinea corporis. Chest X-rays revealed the presence in at least 
three individuals of healed histoplasmosis, and at least two cases of previously 
undetected active pulmonary tuberculosis were discovered. Sarcoidosis, a disease 
of uncertain etiology, has been linked to some of the respiratory fungal diseases. 
Intestinal parasites were the rule. We personally saw under the microscope 
pin worms, hook worms, round worms, and amoeba, often occurring in combi- 
nation in a single patient, and invariably occurring in several members of the 
same family, when present in one. Of the eight drinking-water sources which 
we cultured, six were contaminated with fecal organisms. (See picture in text 
showing two old oil barrels serving as water reservoir for four families — 23 
people.) Cramped living quarters combined with contaminated drinking water 
virtually assure the spread of any communicable or parasitic disease. 

2. TOXIC DISORDEaiS 

We have reason to suspect that a certain percentage of the migrant workers 
were exposed to toxic materials, notably pesticides used in the agricultural 
industry. Acute pesticide poisoning is easily diagnosed. We saw no evidence for 
this. On the other hand, many patients gave us a history of having been sprayed 
or been in fields shortly after a rain at which time they suffered numbness and 
tingling of hands and feet, and many described a seasonal skin rash associated 
with the use of pesticides, notably organophosphorus compounds and chlorinated 
hydrocarbons. 

3. METABOLIC DISEASES 

Metabolic disease in this population included diabetes/mellitis which occurs 
in high incidence in the Mexican-American. We feel that the examination of 
urine alone, while relatively unsatisfactory as a diagnostic procedure, un- 
covered 14 patients with previously undetected glycosuria. These patients must 
now be studied with glucose tolerance tests to confirm the presence of diabetes. 
Thyroid disease was common, and several cases of thyrotoxicosis were observed 
and at least two cases of hyxedema (thyroid deficiency) were seen. We were 
impressed with the palpably enlarged thyroid glands. The McGanity report 
had earlier emphasized the presence of endemic goiter in this population, and 
this we confirmed by clinical examination. It is not absolutely certain that the 
gene.sis for this is iodine deficiency alone. Tlie possibility exists that this popu- 
lation may have a diet that is itself goiterogenic. 

4. NUTRITIONAL DISBIA.8E 

Nutritional disease was common and consisted primarily of protein malnu- 
trition. Caloric malnutrition was not seen, and the pathetic wasting of prisoners 



5090 

of war and individuals in certain far eastern countries was absent. On the otber 
hand, extreme obesity due to a predominantly carbohydrate diet and associated 
changes in hair, skin, and nails reflected significant protein malnutrition. It is 
a point of pride among the people that they claim to provide meat for their 
families, but the physical manifestations of protein malnutrition seen in the 
children do not support this contention. We suspect that meat, like milk, is only 
available on ix)st-pay weekends. Vitamin deficiencies were extremely common. 
Evidence of ariboflavinosis. rickets, and pellagra were confirmed by the two 
nutritionists with us, and painful chewing and swollen bleeding gums suggestive 
of scurvy were seen in several children. 

5. NEOPLASTIC DISEASE 

Neoplastic disea.se was not common. It is not likely that we made a primary 
diagnosis of malignant disease in any person, and the Papanicolaou smears 
of cerivical mucosa in 27 individuals failed to reveal malignant change, though 
bacterial and mycotic infections were common. Basal cell carcinomas of the 
skin was suggestive on several older individuals with heavy actinic exposure. 
We did examine three patients who were known to have malignant disease, one 
of whom had been treated intensively for lymphosarcoma and was in a terminal 
state. Prostatic carcinoma, resected carcinoma of the stomach, and a number of 
breast malignancies which had been operated were seen. 

6. TRAUMATIC INJURIES 

Traumatic injuries were common and head injuries, injuries to the cervical 
and lumbar spine, and thoracic injuries, resulting in fractured ribs, were seen 
or confirmed on X-ray. It was remarkable how few of these had received what 
would be considered adequate follow-up care. 

7. CONGENITAI, LESIONS 

Congenital lesions were seen with some frequency. Most commonly, harelip, 
cleft palate, pilodinal cysts, and two children were seen with congenital 
cataracts, the genesis of which was not clear. Four children with congenital 
strabismus were seen. We were disturbed by the fact that one six-year-old child 
with cleft palate had not been oi>erated, and had experienced continuous feed- 
ing problems, including reflux of food and liquids through the nose. 

8. DEGENERATIVE DISEASE 

Degenerative disease in older individuals was common, including arterio- 
sclerotic heart disease, arterio.sclerosis obliterans, and osteoarthritis, particu- 
larly of the hips, knees and hands. Degenerative and actinic changes of the skin 
were often associated with small, basal-cell carcinomas which we could document 
by clinical examination, but which were not biopsied. 

9. DENTAL PROBLEMS 

Denial problems existed in every individual we examined. These included 
advanced dental caries, pyorrhea alveolaris and other evidence of periodontal 
and root-canal disease. 

10. SPEECH, HEARING, VISION 

Speech, hearing and vision defects were common, particularly in children. 
Congenital and acquired strabismus and cataracts were seen, and the survey 
team was impressed by the high incidence of hearing loss in children with 
chronic ear infections which had been untreated. 

11. ME:nTAL, emotional, developmental, and LEARNING DISORDERS 

Mental and emo'^ional disorders were common, though difficult to a.ssess during 
our brief examinations. Developmental, behavioral, and learning di-sorders were 
also difficult to assess, but we commonly saw children far behind in school, in 
some cases in which we were able to document previously unrecognized hearing 
loss or loss of visual acuity. 

From the combination of our history and physical examination, coupled to the 
laboratory and X-ray studies and our overall clinical impression, the following 
general observations can be made : 



5091 

1. Malnutri'^ion in adults, particularly the aged and in growing children 
and infants, was commonplace. This was manifest clinically by the presence of 
rhagades, chelosis, hyperkeratosis, night blindness, keratitis, blapharitis, photo- 
phobia, and skin lesions resembling those of an expoliative dermatitis. These ob- 
sen^ations confirm and extend earlier findings by the "Select Study on Human 
Nutri ion" made in this same community two years earlier. Manifest evidence of 
vitamin A, D, and B-comples deficiencies were clinically observed. 

2. Chronic skin disease, including superficial fungal infections, impetigo, and 
exfoliated dermatitis occurred in a significant number of patients. Many of the 
older individuals who had worked in the sun most of their life had 'multiple 
superficial skin tumors, several of which were thought clinically to be basal-cell 
carminoma. We did not see lesions of squamous cell oarminoma. 

3. We found a high incidence of visual and hearing loss, particularly in the 
aged and in school-aged children. Growing evidence suggests that hearing loss in 
children, arising from untreated or inadequately treated otitis media, may serve 
as a "tracer" disease reflecting inadequacy of health care. For this reason the 
National Science Foundation has inaugurated a long-term study of hearing loss. 

4. Intestinal parasitism was extremely common and had, in most instances, 
never been treated, except with home remedies by "curanderos." 

5. Metabolic disease, including diabetes mellitis and thyroid disease was fre- 
quent, and we were particularly impressed by the number of palpably enlarged 
thyroids representing endemic goiter. 

6. Invariably, the mothers showed evidence of the "multiple pregnancy syn- 
drome," which includes chronic anemia, weakness, in many cases, and evidence 
of unrepaired cervical lacerations. This is an empiric syndrome which is diag- 
nosed retrosi)ectively in a mother with multiple births over a short span of time. 
This is largely an intuitive diagnosis, but was commented upon repeatedly by 
the examining physicians. 

7. One of the most disturbing aspects of our survey was the evidence of neglect 
of dental hygiene and proper oral care. Furthermore, in the presence of this 
destruction of teeth and gums, we saw little evidence of repair of carious teeth 
and no evidence of prostheses. Pyorrhea alverolaris was common. 

8. We saw uncorrected congenital deformities which would have responded 
well to appropriate surgical therapy. 

9. Rehabilitation of patients with nerve injuries, with fractures, and with 
strokes leading to hemiplegie and hemiparesis was unknown. Not one single in- 
dividual with a residual impairment of gait or motor function had enjoyed 
the benefits of rehabilitative care, aside from that associated with return to work 
at a lower level of productivity. 

10. We saw patients with a history of seizures. During our clinic visit, one 
young man of 16 had a grand mal seizure which started as a Jacksonian march, 
suggesting localization, but no neurological workup had been performed. 

11. Multiple back deformities were seen, including scoliosis and kyphosis, occa- 
sionally due to injury but in a number of cases no explanation was forthcoming 
from the patients as to the genesis of their deformity. Undiagnosed back, hip, 
and lower-extremity pain was a common symptom in young individuals, but 
was diflicult to document on physical examination. Symptomatically this pain 
resembled that of degenerative osteoarthritis, usually found in older people. 

12. Active pulmonary tuberculosis was discovered by X-ray, as well as sarcoid- 
osis, a pulmonary disease or uncertain etiology. 

13. Degenerative diseases of the heart and great vessels, was extremely com- 
mon, as was hypertension. 

14. Anemia was not a common finding in these individuals. When it was ob- 
served, it was usually due to a combination of iron deficiency, protein mal- 
nutrition, and intestinal parasitism. The "multiple pregnancy syndrome" may 
also have been important in some of the anemia we observed. 

In this recounting, it is difficult to convey the overall impression of our group 
in an objective fashion. Four consecutive days of an endless parade of illness, 
deformity, disability, and human suffering exerted a profound and demoralizing 
effect upon our team. While we had reason to question the wisdom of having 
brought students with us, the demoralizing effect was as profound on older 
physicians as on young medical students. 

The people whom we examined represent an almost "pure culture" of a society 
totally peripheral to the influence of American health care. In a nation where 
levels of specialty care in medicine have achieved laudable heights, this group has 
not yet found its way to our most rudimentary care facilities. Such simple neces- 



5092 

sities as glasses, false teeth, braces, hearing aids, dental rer>air, rehabilitation, 
plastic surgery, reijair of congenital deformities, maintenance of simple hygiene, 
and repair of cervical lacerations following childbirth, this population — unique- 
ly — seems to have never attaineti. The specialities of plastic surgery, obstectrics 
and gynecology, i)ediatrics, surgical opthalmologj', and otorhinolaryngology have 
no meaning to these people, for they have never had access to this high level 
of professional care. 

The health survey team would wish to stress once more the relative ease with 
which we were able to document the presence of disease, and the absolute im- 
possibility of ascribing cause to these conditions. This is an important distinc- 
tion, for if we are to correct these conditions, we must know and understand 
where the defect lies. If medical and dental care is too expensive, we need to 
know this. If there are simply not enough physicians and dentists and other 
health facilities in this region, this must be emphasized. If socio-cultural bar- 
riers exist, we need to learn to work within these limits. If religious ethic pre- 
vents i)lanned parenthood, we need to find ways to reasonably approach such 
structures. If there are injustices and cruelties which throw up insurmountable 
hunlles to the acquisition of food, of transportation to and from health facilities, 
and of entry into hospitals, we need to know of this. 

Of one fact we have become convinced. If we make significant strides in the 
delivery of health care to the.se individuals and do not change the social environ- 
ment in which they exist, including food, clothing, housing, education and sani- 
tization. we will have done little to change the fundamental situation. Because 
the major cau.ses of these manifold social ills are largely economic in nature, 
any effort we make must be tempered with an understanding of the deficiencies of 
our entire .social structure, which tend to punish, .selectively, the poor of our 
society. If this Committee addresses itself to medical care problems, specifically 
the doctor-patient relationship, and fails to grasp the complexity of the deficiency 
in the total life style and needs of this population, then our myopic attempts 
to achieve good health care will fail. 

In an attempt to achieve objectivity in this report, charges will be linked to 
suggestions for change. I feel that physicians, and other health providers are 
individually responsible for a form of apathy and indiiference which is generated 
by long association with illness. Each physician must retain his sensitivity to ill- 
ness and its effect on the community as a whole. He must be willing to stand up 
and call attention to urgent local health needs. It requires courage to refuse to 
tolerate these conditions. He and his colleagues must search for ways to more 
effectively participate in community health programs. Furthermore, in every 
poor community I have vLsited in the pa.st two yeans, the phy.sician's primary or 
follow-on fee constitutes the .single most significant barrier in the minds of the 
poor to their .seeking early medical help. Physician collectively, throughout their 
coujity. state, and national medical associations, both black and white, are re- 
.sponsible for failing to exert leadership in our country for the development of 
health care programs which would, at a local level, bring resolution to the.se 
problems. 

I feel that elected officials, particularly county judges sitting on commissioner 
courts or in other administrative occupations, hold the key over local options, 
both in the solicitation of state and federal funds, and more importantly, how 
these monies are .spent in their counties. 

I believe that hospitals, operating as non-profit, tax-exempt corporations, both 
public and private, have failed to exercise innovation and courage in the develop- 
ment of community programs which would reach out to the poor and almost-poor, 
and eliminate such hurdles to care as the "means" test. 

We believe that the Federal Government, through well-intentioned legislation, 
has in some cases, createtl absolute barriers to better health care. A recent case 
in point involves Medicare legi.slation which requires that registered nur.«es be 
on duty on all shifts in hospitals receiving Medicare funds. This has recently re- 
sulted in the imminent closing of at least .six hospitals serving the Rio Grande 
Valley, which, while giving limited health care, nevertheless provided a critical 
.service for the migrant worker and his family. Additionally, Medicare legisla- 
tion does not specifically pa.v for immunization for these individuals and we are 
now reaping the harvest of this shortsightedness in our current polio epidemic. 

Finally, many corporations in our country have placed self interest too far 
above community concern and have failed to exert that leadership which their 
economic .strength could have allowed. Insurance carriers have .set patterns for 
health care compensation which have encouraged over utilization of our hospi- 



5093 

tals, and increased costs in insurance premiums, which have become prohibitive 
for the poor. The renewed attempts of the valley migrants to unionize may 
provide them the strength to bargain collectively to force sucTi issues as a fair 
wage and decent living conditions and adequate health care insurance. The recent 
pressures to develop a form of National Health Insurance and group, pre-paid 
health coverage may provide a direct, and overdue, remedy for these injustices. 

In a wholly different vein, and, perhaps, to move the cynic, a pragmatic 
approach to the nutritional and health problems of the poor may have greater 
impact than an appeal to altruistic sentiments. What we are doing to the poor 
in our country today is simply bad business. We are losing valuable man-hours 
of productive labor by allowing this human wastage to continue. In a recent 
study, Correa and Cummins (Am. J/Clin. Nutrition: 23:560-565. May 1970, 
demonstrate that increased caloric consumption accounted for 5% of the growth 
of the nation product, in nine Latin American countries, a contribution nearly 
as great as education. We have failed to conduct the business of the nation in a 
businesslike fashion. 

The findings described here are not limited to the Rio Grande Valley, to the 
Mexican-Americans, or to the migrant worker. Disease of this magnitude we 
have seen in the ghettoes of American cities, and in rural areas throughout the 
nation. I would state emphatically that enough evidence is now at hand for ua 
to roll up our sleeves and get to work. 



APPENDIX 



List of Field Foundation Participants in Hidalgo- Starr County Health 
Survey March 3-8, 1970 



Iradell Bell 
Joseph Brenner, M.D. 
Robert Coles, M.D. 
Larry Culpepper 
Peter B. Edelman 
Anita Garcia 
Sheldon Greenfield 
Felicia Hance, M.D. 
Gordon Harper, M.D. 
John Hutchinson 
Melvin Krant, M.D. 
Richard Le Blond 
David Iveonard 
Harry Lipscomb, M.D. 



Andrew MacMahon, M.D. 
William Miller 
Donald Muirhead, M.D. 
John Naiden 
Buford Nichols. M.D. 
Robert Nolan, M.D. 
David Osier 
Stephen Prescott 
Robert Rosenberg, M.D. 
D. E. Sagov, M.D. 
Milton J. E. Senn, M.D. 
Raymond Wheeler, M.D. 
Carey Windier 
Carol Winograd 



Enumerativb Listing of Medical Conditions Observed in Hidalgo-Starb 
County Health Survey 



7. 



1. chronic sinusitis 

2. chronic bronchitis 

3. otitis media with perforation 

4. unexplained adenopathy 

5. failure to thrive 
positive serology 
T.B. 

8. T.B. on I.N.H. 

9. costochronditis 

10. osteoarthritis 

11. scoliosis 

12. fractured rib, untreated 

13. hypertensive cardiovascular 

disease 

14. obesity 

15. peptic ulcer 

16. tai)eworin 

17. ascariasis 

18. pin worms 

19. hypertension, untreated 



20. fimgus infection of skin 

21. varicose veins with thrombo- 

phlebitis 

22. dental caries 

23. epistaxis, recurrent 

24. tinea corporis 

25. I.V. septal defect 

26. diabetes mellitus 

27. splenomegaly 

28. ovarian cyst 

29. anemia 

30. enuresis (age 12) 

31. hematuria 

32. bronchial asthma 

33. bursitis 

34. reactive depression 

35. cholecystitis/cholelithiasis 

36. cataracts, unoperated 

37. hernia, unoperated 

38. protein malnutrition 



5094 



cleft palate, uncorrected, 6 years 
spinal cord lesion with 

Lj, 3 deficit 
congestive heart failure 
maduromycosis 
tonsillitis 
psoriasis 

recto-vaginal fistula 
paraplegia, field injury 
mental retardation 
thrush 
amebiasis 
bilateral ptergium 
ruptured lumbar disc 
hiatus hernia 
pyorrhea alveolaris 
arteriosclerosis 

obliterans 
tendon injury, unrepaired 
umbilical hernia 
laryngotracheobronchitis 
bilateral scortal hydrocele 
birth defect 
club foot 
G. I. bleeding 
congenital heart disease 
migraine 

strabismus, uncorrected 
cellulitis 
craniostenosis 
cancer of prostrate 
heart block 
infantile hemiplegia 
cystocele 
emphysema 
vaginal bleeding 
broken hip 

April 2, 1970. 
Dr. Ramiro R. Casso, 
Mc Allen, Tex. 

Dear Doctor Casso: I enclose herewith copies of the bacteriological analysis 
of water samples derived from the colonias in Hidalgo and Starr Govmties dur- 
ing our recent visit. These analyses have been performed by the Laboratories 
of the Texas State Department of Health. 

Of the eight .samples ^ from our first study, involving the Colonies of El Gato, 
Los Velas Progresso, Rancho Colorado, Llano Grande, and Aqua Dulce, six of 
these showed the presence of coliform organi.sms. 

I hoi^ measures to correct this problem can be inaugurated at once. 
Sincerely, 

Harry S. Lipscomb, M.D., 
Director, Xerox Center for Health Care Research, 

Baylor College of Medicine. 

^ Because of mechanical limitations and the condition of the forms submitted they 
could not be reproduced for this hearing record but may be found In the files of the 
subcommittee. 



39. 


hyperkeratosis 


76. 


40. 


conjunctivitis 


77. 


41. 


impetigo 




42. 


glaucoma 


78. 


43. 


sarcoidosis 


79. 


44. 


cardiomegaly 


80. 


45. 


goiter 


81. 


46. 


pyelonephritis 


82. 


47. 


hearing loss 


83. 


48. 


ga.stritis 


84. 


49. 


glomerulonephritis 


85. 


50. 


hemorrlioids, bleeding, untreated 


86. 


51. 


pellagra 


87. 


52. 


ariboflavinosis 


88. 


53. 


epilepsy 


89. 


54. 


seborrheic dermatitis 


90. 


55. 


alopecia areata 


91. 


56. 


cervicitis 




57. 


rickets 


92. 


58. 


hyiierthyroidism 


93. 


59. 


visual loss, untreated 


94. 


60. 


infantile diarrhea 


95. 


61. 


cerebral palsy 


96. 


62. 


untreated fractured knee 


97. 


63. 


scabies 


98. 


&i. 


chronic pancreatitis 


99. 


65. 


iodine deficiency goiter 


100. 


66. 


unbiopsied neck nodule, 3 cm. 


101. 


67. 


diverticulitis 


102. 


68. 


iron deficiency anemia 


103. 


69. 


endometritis 


104. 


70. 


feeble-mindedness 


105. 


7L 


cystitis 


106. 


72. 


urethritis 


107. 


73. 


esophagitis 


108. 


74. 


chronic alcoholism 


109. 


75. 


exposure to i>esticides 


110. 



5095 

Contribution of Nutrition to Economic Growth 
(By Hector Correa/ M.S.C., Ph.D. and Gaylord Cummins,^ B.A., Ph.D., M.P.H) 

Malnutrition may retard the economic growth of poor countries in many ways, 
as has been summarized by Berg (1). Malnutrition reduces life expectancy and 
so reduces the productive years to be expected from newly born children. By 
reducing resistance to disease, malnutrition may increase absence from work. 
Some specific nutritional deficiencies limit productivity, as for example, those 
that may cause blindness. The mental and physical growth of poorly fed chil- 
dren is retarded, so that their productivity as adults is reduced. Malnutrition 
affects the ability of children to learn and may even cause death. Therefore, 
it reduces the number of workers available and increases the cost of training. 
Low levels of calorie consumption restrict productivity on the job. As Berg (1) 
also Indicates, there is only fragmentary quantitative information concerning 
the relation between nutrition and productivity, and none of it, at least in its 
present form, permits one to say whether the contribution of better nutrition 
to economic growth is large, small, or negligible. Such information is impor- 
tant because the decisions that depend on it are crucial. These include, for 
example, decisions concerning the allocation of scarce foreign exchange between 
imports of food and other goods, the allocation of new investment between agri- 
culture and manufacturing and even the allocation of a nation's resources be- 
tween production for current consumption and for growth in the stock of capi- 
tal equipment. To the extent that such choices affect nutrition and that present 
and future output depend on the nutritional status of workers, these choices 
are presently being made very nearly in the dark. To put the matter a little 
differently, the knowledge that nutrition contributes to economic development 
is not, by itself, very helpful. There are innumerable ways of using resources 
that contribute to development, but resources are limited and choices must 
be made. It is, therefore, also essential to know to what extent nutrition con- 
tributes to economic development. 

Accordingly, we wish to report some estimates of the contribution of better 
nutrition to economic growth. The estimates cover 18 countries and the period 
from 1950 to 1962. The countries enjoy per capita incomes ranging from $300 to 
$3,000/year and are evenly divided between an advanced group from Europe and 
the United States, and a less advanced Latin American group. The estimates are 
confined to the effects of increases in calorie consumption on work capacity and, 
as a consequence, on the growth of total output. For this reason, of course, they 
tend to understate, perhaps greatly, the total contribution of better nutriion. 

In an exercise of his kind it is impossible to achieve anything approximating 
the usual precision found in the biomedical sciences. It is, nevertheless, impor- 
tant to do what is possible, and the contribution which we could measure is strik- 
ing for the Latin American countries, even after allowing for all the errors and 
omissions. 

DATA AND METTHODS 

An estimation of the contribution of increased calorie consumption to economic 
growth requires three steps and three sets of metliods. One must first be able to 
measure the growth in output due to the increase in the productive capacity of 
labor. One must then be able to estimate the increa.se in productive capacity of 
labor due to increased calorie consumption. Finally, one must ascertain the 
changes that took place in the calorie consumption of workers. 

Tinbergen (2), Solow (3), Correa (4), Denison (5), and others have developed 
a method for measuring the contributions of increases in productive inputs 
(labors, capital, education, et cetera) to growth of total output. We used this 
method in the first step. As applied here, it rests on the following basic equation : 

rY = arB+arN+A 

where ry is the rate of growth of total output ; a is labor income as a fraction of 
total output ; Te is the rate of growth of the productive capacity of labor attri- 
butable to better education ; /> is the rate of growth of the productive capacity 
of labor attributable to increased calorie consumption ; and A is a residual reflect- 
ing such factors as technological progress, growth in the stock of physical capital, 



1 Associate Professor, Department of Economics and Center for Population and Family 
Studies, Tulane University. New Orleans, Louisiana. 

^ Assistant Professor, Department of Tropical Medicine and International Health and 
Department of Economics, Tulane University. 



5096 

and the various effwts of better nutrition that we could not measure separately. 
If, for example, the working capacity of the labor force increased by rA»100% 
because of In^tter nutrition and if the ratio of lalwr income to total output were a, 
then one could conclude that better nutrition accounted for ar.v/rvlOO% of the 
growth in total output. The decision to study explicitly those factors that con- 
tribute to economic growth or those that are to be set aside under A, depends 
entirely on the availability of data and the purpose at hand. We present esti- 
mates of the effects of education in order to compare them with the effects of 
increased calorie consumption. 

The plausibility of the findings depends in part on the credibility of the 
relationship just described. A brief explanation is, therefore, required of the 
assumptions from which it is derived. There are two. First, the economy in 
question works as if it were "perfectly comi>etitive," namely, the prices of 
goods and services were determined by supply and demand in open markets. 
Some such assumption is indispensable, and generally this one has proved to 
be the most useful. (It underlies, for example, all measures of the "economic 
burden" of particular diseases.) Secondly, the economy is characterized by 
"constant returns to scale." This means that if all productive inputs were to 
increase in a given proportion, output would increase in the same proportion. 
Again some such assumption is unavoidable, and this one has proved to be the 
most useful. 

(The second step in estimating the effect of increased calorie consumption en- 
tails ascertaining the relation between calorie intake and work capacity. From 
experimental data, Lehmann et al. (6) have estimated the relation between 
calorie intake and work capacity for four categories of work, classified laccord- 
ing to how heavy the work is. They provide detailed descriptions of kinds of 
occupations that fall into each category, and with these data we were able to 
establish a fair corre.spondence between their classification and the United 
Nations international classification of industries (7). Their results, arranged 
according to the United Nations industrial classification, are shown in Table I 
below. For Each industrial group the table shows for various levels of calorie 
intake the work done as a percentage of the maximum that could be done with 
adequate nutrition in the same way at both ends of the period studied. For 
this reason, too, the errors in the estimates of growth in capacity to work would 
be smaller than those contained in the estimates of capacity to work for single 
years. 

The methods described so far yielded estimates of actual annual intakes of 
male adults for each industrial group and each country. Before these could be 
compared with the data in Table I we had to make several further adjustments. 
The data in table I were derived for a temperature of about 10 C and for men 
between 20 and 30 years old. We could not a.scertain their weights. We assumed 
an average weight of 65 kg for all countries. This is probably overestimated for 
the Latin American countries and underestimatetl for the others. The resulting 
errors, however, are probably small. A reduction in weight of 5 kg reduces re- 
quired intake by about 100 kcal/day (8). An error of 100 kcal/day, in turn, would 
produce an error of about 5% in estimated working capacity. As before, the same 
error would occur in the results for both the initial and terminal years, so that 
the error in the estimated rate of growth of working capacity would be much 
less than 5%. 

Data are available concerning the relation between calorie requirements and 
average temperature (8), and also for average temperatures in the 18 countries 
(9, 10). The basic temperature data are for areas within each country. We com- 
ix)und countrywide averages using area populations as weights and then con- 
verted the estimated calorie intakes into the ecjuivalents for an average tempera- 
ture of 10 C. 

The effect of additional calorie consumption on work capacity presumably 
decreases with age. To allow for this effect of differences in age, we assumed that 
the effects of increa.sed intake shown in Table I held exactly for ages 15-30 and 
diminished continuously over older ages, reaching zero at age 60. 

In regard to sex differences, we assumed that for each age group women's ca- 
pacity to work increa.sed in the .same proportion as men's. 

The steps just described determined estimates of the growth in productive 
capacity of the labor force due to increa.sed calorie con.sumption. r.v, for each 
country. From these estimates and national income data (7) we computed the 
rate of growth of output attributable to increased caloric consumption. otat-IOO 
equals percent increa-se. 



5097 

There is no need to describe here tlie details of the metliod by which the value 
of the contribution of education was estimated. In the case of the advanced 
countries, we took the estimates directly from Denison (5). Using comparable 
data and methods, estimates were derived for the Latin American countries. 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

The estimated contributions of increased calorie consumption to the growth 
of output for the 18 countries are showai in Table II. The contribution in the 
advanced countries was practically nil. Although there was considerable varia- 
tion among the Latin American countries, the contribution there was in most 
cases substantial, averaging almost 5% of output growth. This was nearly as 
large as the contribution of education. The results of these comparisons are not 
surprising ; production proce.sses in the less advanced countries make compara- 
tively modest demands in relation to educational attainment and comparatively 
heavy demands on physical health. The reverse tends to be true of advanced 
countries. 



TABLE II. 



-CONTRIBUTIONS OF INCREASED CALORIE INTAKE AND EDUCATION TO GROWTH OF NATIONAL 
PRODUCT IN SELECTED COUNTRIES 1950-62 



Country 



National 

product 

percent 

rate of 

growth/year 

(A) 



Increased calorie intake 

Percent rate 
of growth 
of national 

product (B) as percent 
contributed of (A) 



(B) 



(C) 



Education 



Percent rate 
of growth 
of national 

product (D) as percent 



contributed 
(D) 



of (A) 
(E) 



Latin America: 

Argentina 

Brazil 

Chile... 

Colombia 

Ecuador 

Honduras 

Mexico 

Peru 

Venezuela 

Average 

Europe and United States 

Belgium.. 

Denmark _ 

France 

Germany 

Italy 

Netherlands.-- 

Norway-- 

United Kingdom 

United States - 

Average 



3.19 








0.53 


16.5 


5.43 


.23 


4.2 


.18 


3.3 


4.20 


.05 


1.2 


.20 


4.8 


4.79 


.31 


6.4 


.20 


4.1 


4.72 








.23 


4.9 


4.52 


.41 


9.1 


.29 


6.5 


5.97 


.60 


10.1 


.05 


.8 


5.63 


.43 
.18 


7.6 






7.74 


2.4 


.19 


2.4 


5.13 


.25 


4.6 


.23 


5.4 


3.20 


.02 


.6 


.43 


13.4 


3.51 








.14 


4.0 


4.92 


.05 


1.0 


.29 


5.9 


7.26 


.16 


2.2 


.11 


1.5 


5.96 


.16 


2.7 


.40 


6.7 


4.73 








.24 


5.1 


3.45 








.24 


7.0 


2.29 


.01 


.4 


.29 


12.7 


3.32 








.49 


14.8 



4.18 



.04 



.29 



7.9 



Since increased calorie consumption by itself raised output almost as much 
as did education, the aggregate effect of better nutrition on output may well 
have exceed^ that of education. For some purposes it would be more important 
to know the effect of better nutrition on growth of output per capita than its 
effect on growth of total output. At present there is no satisfactory method for 
measuring the contribution of health to growth in output per capita. This is 
chiefly because improved health affects growth of population as well as that 
of output. But in the case of nutrition, the effect on ix>pulation growth probably 
is c-omparatively small ; since total output grew more than twice as rapidly as out- 
put i^er capita, increasetl calorie consumption may, on the average, have cau.sed 
as much as 10% of the growth in output per capita. 

Existing data are inadequate for systematic estimation of the contributions 
of nutrition and education to the economic growth of very ix)or countries where 
the per capita incomes are less than .$200/year. One may comment, however, 
about the contribution of increased calorie consumption in those countries. As 
income and output grow, the proportion of the labor force engaged in occupations 



5098 



I 



requiring relatively high calorie consumption tends to decrease (11). The poorer 
a country is, the greater the effei't of increased calorie consumption on economic 
growth tends to be. Among our IS countries the coefficient of correlation between 
the contribution of increased calorie consumption and the level of per capita 
income is —0.56 and the significance is at the .">% level. These considerations 
suggest that increased calorie consimiption contributed even more to the eco- 
nomic growth of very poor countries than to that of the Latin American group. 
Our estimates clearly rest on a series of more or less questionable assumptions. 
This was unavoidable, partly because the necessary national data are either 
lacking or defective, and also the exi>erimental evidence concerning a number 
of relationships involved in the method of estimation is incomplete. It would 
have heU)ed, for example, to have had data on the distribution, by occupation, 
of workers' consumption of calories. The estimates also could have been improved 
had there l)een data similar to those in Table I but derived for older groups 
of workers. In any event, the description of the methods we used indicates the 
information necessary if one is to estimate the economic consequences of improved 
nutrition, or, for that matter, of any improvements in health that affect capac- 
ity to work. 

SUMMARY 

Malnutrition may in many ways imi>ede the economic growth of poor countries. 
Even though imiwrtant ixtlicy deci.sions dei)end on quantitative data concerning 
the effect of nutrition on economic growth, there is little such information avail- 
able. We have estimated effects of increa.sed calorie con.sumption on the produc- 
tive capacity of the labor force and, therefore, on the economic growth, of 18 
countries from 1950 to 1962. For nine Latin American countries increased calorie 
consumption accounted, on the average, for almost 5% of the growth of national 
product. This was nearly as great as the contribution of eductition. Increased 
calorie consumption had a negligible effect on the economic growth of nine 
advanced countries. It probably causes a substantially larger fraction of the 
growth in output per capita than of the growth in total output in p<M)r countries. 
Also, its effect is probably greater in very poor countries than in the Latin 
American group. 

REFP^RENCES 

1. Berg, A. D. Malnutrition and national development. ./. Trop. Pediat. 14 : 116, 1968. 

2. Ti.NBERGEX, .1. Zur Theorlc der lanfrfristipen WlrtschaftsenwIcklunK. Weltwirt- 
schaftliches Arch. 5,5 : .511, 1942. 

.S. Solow, R. M. Technical change and the aggreRate production function. Rev. Econ. 
Stat. .39 : .S12, 1957. 

4. Correa, H. The Economics of Human Rcsourcex. Amsterdam : North-Holland, 1962. 

5. Denlson, E. F. Why Growth Eaten Differ. Washington, D.C. : Brookings Institution, 
1967. 

6. Lehmann^ G., B. A. Muller and H. Spltzer. Der Calorlenbedarf bel gewerblicher 
Arbeit. Arbeitsphyaiologie 14 : 166, 1950. 

7. U.N. Statistical Office. Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs. Statistical Yearbook. 
New York, 1951-1966. 

8. Calorie Requirements. Report of the FAO 2nd Committee on Calorie Requirements. 
F.A.O. Xutr. Studies, no. 15. Rome, 1957. 

9. U.S. Dept. Agr. Yearbook of Agriculture. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Govt. Printing 
Office, 1941. 

10. Pan American Union, America en Cifra 1967: Situacion Fiaica, Territoria y Clima. 
Washington, D.C, 1967. 

11. Kuznets, S. Findings on industrial structure of labor force and national product. 
Six Lectures on Economic Growth. Glencoe, III. : The Free Press, p. 4.3. 

Senator Mondale. Our next witness is Dr. Ramiro R. Casso. 

STATEMENT OF RAMIRO CASSO, M.D., GENERAL PRACTITIONER, 

McALLEN, TEX. 

Dr. Casso. Senator Mondale, members of the Senate Subcommittee 
on Migratory Labor. I am Dr. Ramiro R. Casso of McAllen (Hidalgo 
County), Tex. I am a doctor of medicine and have been in the general 
practice of medicine and surgery in McAllen, Tex., for the past 13 
years. 

My medical i)ractice consists in treating from 50 to 100 patients per 
day, the vast majority of whom are poor people. Probably as many as 
80 percent of my patients are farmworkers, some migrants and other 



5099 

exmigrants who do farm work, packing shed labor, or some other simi- 
lar seasonal work locally. 

Suffice it to say that my people are among the poorest in this affluent 
society. Because of their wretched earnings, our people suffer all of 
the consequences of being poor. There is severe malnutrition among 
large numbers of them and this enhances their susceptibility to all 
forms of disease. It is no mystery that nutritional anemia, protein 
malnutrition, diarrheas, tuberculosis, skin infections, influenzas, pneu- 
monia, birth defects, prematurity, and neonatal deaths are much more 
prevalent among the farmworkers' families than among the general 
population. 

Mr. Chairman, the health survey conducted in March 1970 in 
Hidalgo County by the very eminent physicians assembled by the 
Field Foundation was a milestone in the area of health in south Texas 
for several reasons. First, it documented the high incidence of malnu- 
trition, vitamin deficiencies, and disease which was suspected by many 
to exist. Secondly, a very excellent presentation of the findings was 
made by Dr. Harry Lipscomb of Baylor Medical College to a meeting 
of the Hidalgo-Starr County Medical Society. Thirdly, and most im- 
portant of all. Dr. Lipscomb was successful in challenging the medical 
society and Dr. Carl Love of McAllen, his former student and presently 
the president of the Hidalgo-Starr County Medical Society, to take 
the lead in mobilizing the medical community in search of solutions to 
the enormous medical problems of the area. 

Those solutions, if they are implemented, will include ending the 
present hesitancy of our hospitals to serve all of the people, rich and 
poor alike. At the McAllen Hospital, where I work, we have the latest 
X-ray and laboratory equipment, every excellent surgical suites and a 
completely equipped coronary care unit. Hopefully, in the future more 
poor patients will be able to avail themselves of these facilities. 

Those solutions, if they are implemented, will include an expansion 
of the public health activities in Hidalgo County. At present these 
activities are limited to tuberculosis detection, followup on contagious 
diseases and immunization of children. The inadequacy of our immuni- 
zation program was pointed out during the past 2 months "when in 
Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, we had nearly all the suspected cases 
in the Nation of poliomyelitis. 

Beyond the efficient carrying out of these activities, we hope the 
public health officials will provide forms of treatment, outreach, and 
care Avhich serve the poverty community. 

Those solutions, if they are implemented, will also include the ex- 
pansion of the migrant health program in this area of Texas. In the 
meantime, those of us who are concerned, do what we can. 

I have been personally operating a charity clinic at the Farmworkers 
Service Center in McAllen at the invitation of Tony Orendain, who 
also heads the farmworkers organization for Cesar Chavez in the 
Rio Grande Valley. With the aid of Sister Sharon Stanton, a Catholic 
nun who is also a registered nurse, we hold a 2-hour clinic three times 
a week. We treat from 40 to 120 patients a week, but are limited by the 
lack of adequate equipment, examining rooms, and the absence of 
X-ray or laboratory facilities. At this clinic we treat only those who 
do not have medicare, medicaid, or migrant health coverage, and who 
have no money to see a private physician. 



5100 

It is very discouraging and depressing to attempt to operate a char- 
ity medical clinic with very limited resources. I want to tell you some- 
thing about how the farmworkers clinic was started. 

Last year, when I received the first letter that Tony Orendain wrote 
to all the members of the Hidalgo-Starr County Medical Society, ask- 
ing us to start a medical clinic, I visited the United Farm Workers 
Service Center in McAllen and discussed the matter with him at 
length. As it turned out, Tony was able to spare a corner 100 feet 
wide by 12 feet long and that was where the clinic was started. Tony 
obtained an old table that I used for an examining table and with a few 
sheets of sheetrock constructed partitions to provide the necessary 
privacy for physical examinations. 

I obtained some medications and medical supplies from my office 
and we began to treat the sick. By word of mouth the word was passed 
in the "colonias," and though many of the sick do not have trans- 
portation or do not even know that the clinic exists, yet during the 
January 1970 influenza epidemic we were seeing from 45 to 50 patients 
each day. It became obvious that we couldn't continue this operation 
out of a 10- by 12-foot loc^ile, so I offered Tony Orendain that I would 
personally pay the first month's rent in an adjoining building if he 
would assume the responsibility thereafter. 

He accepted and we moved to our present location, which is grossly 
inadequate in all respects, but which at least gives us four to five times 
more space than we had before. 

Gentlemen, the lighting in the clinic is very poor. Somebody has 
to go clear across the room to plug in the single examining lamp that 
we have. We have no examining tables per se, we have no medical 
cabinets. We do not have a certain supply of injectable medications 
except those that I bring from my private office. We have no refrigera- 
tor to keep our medicines in. We do not have a laboratory to do a sim- 
ple blood count or urinalysis or an X-ray machine to take a chest X- 

Needless to say, a lot of diagnostic guesswork takes place in the 
clinic, but this is better than no clinic at all. I rely heavily on the use of 
injectables, gentlemen, because very frequently the medication that I 
inject into their bodies is the only medication they will receive, since 
they very frequently do not have the money to fill a written prescrip- 
tion. 

The diseases most frequently seen in the farmworkers clinic are 
those seen in any general ]iractice office where poor ])eople are treated; 
namely, many nutritional anemias, protein malnutrition, upper res- 
l)iratory infections, draining ear infections, pneumonias, diarrheas 
with all degrees of dehydration, and many skin infections. 

Mr. Chairman, we need to attract more physicians to the many 
pockets of poverty throughout the country. We need to deemphasize 
specialization in medicine and encourage more medical graduates to 
go into general practice. We need a total commitment from the Con- 
gress and the Executive to j)rovide the facilities and the manpower to 
treat the ailments of all of our citizens regardless of their ability to 
pay. 

We i^ray that you, Mr, Chairman, and your colleagues will search 
for the legal machinery tliat can bring this about. 

Thank you, gentlenien, for your concern and for all your efforts 
to alleviate suffering among the migrants in our Nation, Thank you. 



5101 

Mr. Chairman, for the invitation to appear before this subcommittee. 

Senator Mondale. Dr. Casso, we are most grateful for your testi- 
mony. We are even more grateful for your work. I recall your testi- 
mony at Edinburg, because I thought it was the most helpful of 
all that we received. 

Do you have a guess as to how many migrant mothers deliver 
their babies without professional help 'i 

Dr. Casso. No; I don't, but I know that it is the largest percentage 
in our State, in the southern part of our State where most of the 
Mexican-American people reside, because we have the largest per- 
centage of midwives and others who deliver babies. 

Senator Mondale. If a high percentage of the mothers are not 
under qualified, professional care but under the help of midwives, 
what is your opinion of the general level of competence of the mid- 
wives, particularly how competent are they to liandlc a complicated 
delivery ? 

Dr. Casso. In the cases of uncomplicated delivery, I believe that 
most of them could be trained. Some midwives could be trained to 
handle those cases. 

Certainly many registered nurses could be trained to do that work, 
with the understanding that if any complication became obvious that 
a physician could be called to lend a helping hand. 

Senator Mondale. Isn't it fair to say today that there are hundreds 
of babies born in the general area in which you practice without 
proper, professional care of the mother during birth i 

Dr. Casso. That is true. 

Senator Mondale. And as a result there is a high degree of sub- 
normalcy or other kinds of physical problems which could have 
been easily prevented by just proper care at the time ? 

Dr. Casso. That is correct. 

Senator Mondale. You indicated that the local medical association 
has now become activated, the Hidalgo-Starr County Medical So- 
ciety. What are they doing to help this program ? 

Dr. Casso. I notice today Dr. Carl Love, who is president of the 
Hidalgo-Starr County Medical Society, is here. He is more knowl- 
edgeable as to just what steps have been taken, but they are very 
significant. I believe that Dr. Love has done more to motivate the 
medical society than all the previous presidents of the medical society 
combined. 

Senator Mondale. Thank you. 

Senator Yarborough, do you have any questions ? 

Senator Yarborough. Dr. Casso. the closing paragraph of your 
statement points up one great problem in this country, particularly 
in the poor area, whether they be ghettos or rural areas. That is the 
need for general medical practitioners, family doctors. 

Tlie great age of specialization has hit us. In 1931 three out of four, 
75 percent, of all medical doctors in America were engaged in family 
practice so called. That is 1931. In 1967, only 21 percent were engaged 
in family practice, one out of five. 

Now as chairman of the Health Subcommittee I have a bill pend- 
ing — we have already finished the hearings this year — to pump money 
into medical schools to train family doctors. A number of medical 
schools have already set up this family doctor part of it. They are 

36-513 O— 71— Pt. 8-A 9 



5102 

going to train them there and have them pledged to go into the general 
family practice, so that we can get doctors who are not specialists, but 
can ^et out and treat families in rural areas, in ghettos, any place in 
the cities. 

The one great insecurity families have, not only the poor but the 
middle-class families, is that they don't have somebody that they can 
call a family doctor that they can turn to in an emergency. The polls in 
America show that that is one great shortage all over the Nation. 

Dr. Casso. That is correct. 

Senator Yarborough. "We have a beginning bill on that that I hope 
to be able to push through this year, to obtain some relief in that 
regard. 

The time is so late, Dr. Casso, that I won't ask further questions, but 
one point has been raised here in Dr. Lipscomb's statement that is of 
vast importance to everybody in the Nation. In addition to migrant 
workers, and that is the fourtn paragraph of page 8 of your statement, 
Dr. Lipscomb, you talk about the number of hospitals being closed. 
Thev are closing in the valley, they are closing all over Texas, they are 
closing in Iowa. 

You say that is because of the medicare legislation which rec^uires 
that registered nurses be on duty on all shifts of the hospital receiving 
medicare funds. 

Now I have sent for the law. I have heard a dispute about this as to 
whether this is a law of Congress ; if it is a law of Congress, I want 
to amend it just as soon as we can, and I have here the regulation of the 
Social Security Administration and Medicare Administration — it has 
been phoned in to me here — that the law says that it provides for 24- 
hour nursing service rendered or supervised by a registered profession- 
al nurse and the hospital will be qualified under medicare if it has a 
licensed practical nurse or registered professional nurse on duty at all 
times. 

I have sent for the law itself. If that is what the law provides, it does 
not require that a registered nurse be present at all times. Here it is. I 
am reading the law now from the United States Code, supplement 5, 
1965-69, with these amendments, title 1395X, section E, paragraph 5. 
It has what a hospital has to do to qualify : 

5. Provides 24-hour nursing service rendered or supervised by a registered 
professional nurse and has a licensed practical nurse on duty at all times. 

As a lawyer and former judge, I say that does not require that a 
registered nurse be on duty at all times. That is a hoax. 

That is the way that the people administering the social security law 
in Medicare Administration get around to screen these hospitals out 
so they won't have to pay the bill. If they have a licensed practical 
nurse on duty 24 hours, that will comply with the law. 

These hospitals are being told it won't. "We have the law here. I want 
to put that in the record. I want to call on the Social Security Admin- 
istration this week. I want my staff to prepare proper letters, demand- 
ing that these hospitals not be screened out, that they are eligible in 
my State and in California they are called licensed vocational nurses. 
They are called licensed practical nurses in the other 48 States. 

In the valley they are threatening to close several of them because 
they don't have a registered nurse on duty 24 hours. It is not happen- 
ing only there, it is happening in central Texas, it is happening all 
over the L'nion. 



510S 

Dr. Lipscomb. The implications of what you say is that this is a local 
interpretation of the law which could be changed 

Senator Yarborough. I have heard of it from other States. I think 
it is an interpretation by HEW. The law does not require that a reg- 
istered nurse be on duty. You have to have a registered nurse for the 
hospital to supervise, but she does not have to be there 24 hours a day. 
If you have one registered nurse to supervise what the others are 
doing, that will comply with the law of Congress. 

I won't pursue that further. That is under social security, under an- 
other committee, not our committee. I wanted to point out I am going 
to start work to get some relief there. 

Senator Mondale. Senator Saxbe ? 

Senator Saxbe. I have no questions. 

Senator Mondale. Thank you very much again, Dr. Casso. You are 
making a most significant contribution to the farmworkers in the Rio 
Grande Valley, and I know it is deeply appreciated. 

We will print your entire statement at this point in the record. 

(The prepared statement of Dr. Casso follows :) 

Prepared Statement of Ramiro R. Casso, M.D., General Practitioner, 

McAllen, Tex. 

Senator Mondale, members of the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. I 
am Dr. Ramiro R. Oasso of McAUen (Hidalgo County) Texas. I am a Doctor of 
Medicine and have been in the general practice of medicine and surgery in 
McAllen, Texas, for the past 13 years. 

My medical practice consists in treating from 50 to 100 patients per day, the 
vast majority of whom are poor people. Probably as many as 80% of my patients 
are farmworkers, some migrants and others ex-migrants who now do farmwork, 
packing shed labor, or other similar seasonal work locally. 

Suffice it to say that my people are among the poorest in this affluent society. 
Because of their \ATetched earnings our people suffer all of the consequences of 
being poor. There is severe malnutrition among large numbers of them and this 
enhances their susceptibility to all forms of disease. It is no mystery that nutri- 
tional anemia, protein malnutrition, diarrheas, tuberculosis, skin infections, in- 
fluenzas, pneumonia, birth defects, prematurity and neonatal deaths are much 
more prevalent among the farmworkers' families than among the general 
population. 

Mr. Chairman, the health survey conducted in March, 1970, in Hidalgo County 
by the very eminent physicians assembled by the Field Foundation was a mile- 
stone in the area of health in South Texas for several reasons. First, it docu- 
mented the high incidence of malnutrition, A-itamin deficiencies, and disease 
which was suspected by many to exist. Secondly, a very excellent presentation of 
the findings was made by Dr. Harry Lipscomb of Baylor Medical College to a 
meeting of the Hidalgo-Starr Coimty Medical Society. Thirdly, and most im- 
portant of all, Dr. Lipscomb was successful in challenging the Medical Society 
and Dr. Carl Love of McAllen, his former student and presently the president 
of the Hidalgo-Starr County Medical Society, to take the lead in mobilizing 
the medical community in search of solutions to the enormous medical problems 
of the area. 

Those solutions, if they are implemented, will include ending the present hesi- 
tancy of our hospitals to serve all of the people, rich and poor alike. At the 
McAllen Hospital, where I work, we have the latest x-ray and laboratory equip- 
ment, very excellent surgical suites and a completely equipped coronary care 
unit. Hoi>efully, in the future more poor patients will be able to avail themselves 
of these facilities. 

Those solutions, if they are implemented, will include an expansion of the 
public health activities in Hidalgo County. At present, these activities are 
limited to Tuberculosis detection, follow-up on contagious diseases, and immuni- 
zation of children. The inadequacy of our immunization program was pointed out 
during the past two months when in Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, we had 
nearly all the suspected to have been due to poliomyelitis. Beyond the efficient 
carrying out of these activities, we hope the public health officials will provide 
forms of treatment, outreach, and care which serve the poverty community. 



5104 

Those solutions, if they are implemented, will also include the expansion of the 
Migrant Health Program in this area of Texas. 

In the meantime, those of us who are concerned, do what we can. 

I have been i>ersonally o^ierating a Charity Clinic at the Farmworkers Service 
Center in McAllen at the invitation of Tony Orendain who also heads the Farm- 
workers organization for Cesar Chavez in the Rio Grande "Valley. With the 
aid of Sister Sharon Stanton, a Catholic nun who is also a Registered nurse, 
we hold a two-hour clinic 3 times a week. We treat from 40 to 120 i>atients a 
week, but are limited by the lack of adequate equipment, examining rooms, and 
the absence of X-ray or laboratory facilities. At this clinic we treat only those 
who do not have Medicare. Medicaid or Migrant Health Coverage, and who 
have no money to see a private physician. 

It is very discouraging and depressing to attempt to operate a charity medical 
clinic with very limited resources. I -w^nt to tell you something about how 
the Farmworkers clinic was started. 

Last year, when I received the first letter that Tony Orendain wrote to all 
the mernbers of the Hidalgo-iStarr County Medical Society, asking us to start 
a medical clinic, I visited the United Farm Workers Service Center in McAllen 
and discussed the matter with him at length. As it turned out, Tony was able 
to spare a corner 10 feet wide by 12 feet long and that was where the clinic 
was started. Tony obtained an old table that I used for an examining table and 
with a few sheets of sheetrock constructed partitions to provide the necessary 
privacy for physical examinations. 

I obtained some medications and medical supplies from ray ofl5ce and we 
began to treat the sick. By word of mouth the word was passed in the Colonias, 
and though many of the sick do not have transportation or do not even know 
that the clinic eixsts, yet during the January 1970, influenza epidemic we were 
.seeing from 45 to 50 patients each day. It became obvious that we couldn't 
continue this oi)eration out of a 10' by 12' locale, .so I offered Tony Orendain that 
I would i»ersonally pay the first month's rent in an adjoining building if he 
would assume the responsibility thereafter. 

He accepted and we moved to our present location which is grossly inad- 
equate in all respects, but which at least gives us 4 to 5 times more space than 
we had before. 

(Jentlemen, the lighting in the clinic is very poor. Somebody has to go clear 
across the room to plug in the single examining lamp that we have. We have 
no examining tables per se, we have no medical cabinets. We do not have a 
certain supply of injectable medications except those that I bring from my 
private office ; we have no refrigerator to keep our medicines in ; we do not 
have a laboratory to do a simple blood count or urinalysis or an X-ray machine 
to take a chest X-ray. Needless to say, a lot of diagnostic guess work takes 
place in this clinic, but this is better than no clinic at all. I rely heavily on the 
u.se of injectables, gentlemen, because very frequently the medication that I 
inject into their bodies is the only medication they will receive, since they 
very frequently do not have the money to fill a written prescription. 

The diseases most frequently seen in the Farmworkers Clinic are those seen 
in any general practice oflSce where poor people are treated, namely, many 
nutritional anemias, protein malnutrition, upper respiratory infections, drain- 
ing ear infections, pneumonias, diarrheas with all degrees of dehydration, and 
many skin infections. 

Mr. Chairman, we need to attract more physicians to the many pockets of 
poverty throughout the country. We need to de-emphasize specialization in 
medicine and encourage more medical graduates to go into general practice. 
We need a total commitment from the Congress and the Executive to provide 
the facilities and the manpower to treat the ailments of all of our citizens 
regardless of their ability to pay. We pray that you, Mr. Chairman, and your 
colleagues will search for the legal machinery that can bring this about. 

Senator MoNDALE. Dr. Harper? 

STATEMENT OF GORDON HARPER, M.D., TRAINING IN PEDIATRICS, 

BOSTON, MASS. 

Dr. Harper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My name is Gordon Harper. I am a physician in the second year of 
pediatric training in Boston. I participated in the March trip to 



5105 

Mc Allen, Tex., and, because the northerner sojourning and muckraking 
in the South is legitimately suspect in both southern and northern eyes, 
I have since visited other areas where migrants live and work in 
Connecticut and Michigan. 

Much testimony has already been presented about the number of 
patients we saw in McAUen, the kinds of diseases they presented, and 
how these conditions arise from poverty and discrimination. I would 
like to present a particular case to illustrate what we are talking about. 

A BABY WITH CELLULITIS 

The first day we were working in Dr. Casso's clinic, a young mother 
from Pharr brought in a baby, perhaps a year and a half old, com- 
plaining that his head and neck were swollen. He had been well, she 
told us, until 3 days previously, when insect bites on his scalp became 
infected. During the succeeding days the infection spread and the baby 
grew less active and was not eating well. He developed a fever and now 
just lay about, showing no interest in those around him. 

Examining the baby, we found him well developed and fairly well 
nourished, but acutely ill, "toxic" as we say, lying motionless on the 
examining table. His temperature Avas 106°, his pulse was rapid and 
his respirations labored. One side of his scalp and neck Avas red hot, 
swollen and weeping. Huge lymp nodes were palpable in the adjacent 
areas. Pustules in his scalp, the likely location of the insect bites to 
which the mother referred, seemed to be the source of the the infection. 

This was cellulitis, a bacterial infection of the skin and subcutaneous 
tissues, with probable spread of the infection throughout the baby's 
body — sepsis. We had a very sick baby on our hands. 

What had this infection to do with migrant labor? First of all, it 
began with insect bites, a familiar summer affliction lor all of us, but 
much more common among children who live in substandard housing. 

In Texas all of us saw windows without screening, open latrines, 
inadequate garbage disposal, standing water and gaping holes in floors 
and walls. We saw carrot chips used as ground cover — garbage in the 
front yard. 

In Michigan I visited a migrant camp, near the Aunt Jane pickle 
factory, a Borden subsidiary, built literally right next to a municipal 
sewage pool and garbage dump. The stench was suifocating. 

Under these conditions insects and rodents thrive and attack the 
children playing or sleeping nearby. Moreover, once exposed to such 
bites, babies are much harder to keep clean and the bites more likely 
to be infected if homes have no running water. 

Not surprisingly, then, both in Texas and Michigan, infected bites 
are one of the most frequent conditions found in migrant children, 
directly related to the conditions they must live in. And so was this 
baby's initially trivial infection. 

Secondly, the infection, developing over 2 days, received no medical 
attention until the mother came to us on the third day. Superficial skin 
infections are common problems in children in Boston or Washington 
as in Texas, especially when the weather is warm as it is most of the 
year in the Rio Grande Valley. Treated promptly, with good cleans- 
ing, a clean dressing, and antibiotics as indicated, such an infection 
should never reach the proportions we found in Mc Allen. 



5106 

But we learned there, as you are hearing today, how seldom poor 
people there see doctors. A visit to a private doctor can cost $10, plus 
charges for medicines. Dr. Casso has been one of the few physicians 
in McAllen who would see patients who could not pay, and ^^'e have 
seen under what a heavy caseload he functions. 

This mother, like so many, knew of no free dispensary. There was no 
outpatient department or free emergency ward like those which we 
take for granted in the rest of the country to which she could go. And 
the mother was reluctant to travel to Mexico, where many obtain 
cheaper and moi-e sympathetic care, with a baby so ill. 

I would like you all to understand how it was very difficult for us 
to believe, as this mother had long since learned, that there was no 
place, convenient and close by, where she could take her baby when he 
was sick and she had no money. That was how a minor infection be- 
came a life-threatening one. 

The third part of this baby's case now unfolds : ^^^lat could we do 
about it ? Again, in any of the emergency wards where we have worked, 
where we have been on hand to treat whoever came in, without asking 
who could pay or how much any indicated therapy would cost, this 
baby would have been hospitalized and antibiotic therapy begun with- 
out delay. But in McAllen we had to ask who could pay. 

The answer was that there is no medicaid program in Texas for 
those not already covered under categorical welfare programs, that 
there are no free beds in the local hospital only one block away, and 
that a deposit is required for a patient's admission to that hospital. 
Many people in McAllen, as we will document, have been told after the 
birth of a child in the hospital : "You pay the bill or we keep the 
baby." 

What did we do? The baby received antipyretics and a large in- 
tramuscular injection of antibiotics and was observed for 6 nours 
in the office. He then looked much better, was given another dose, and 
was sent home to return next day. This therapy, good bush medi- 
cine dictated by expediency, "worked"' this time, but is hard to justi- 
fy one block from a general hospitialj the McAllen General Hospital. 

Every parent of a critically ill child, faced with a disease beyond 
the control of aspirin and cough syrup, feels helpless and alone. For 
this baby's mother, however, such helplessness was compounded by 
three facts equally beyond her control, which should have had nothing 
to do with her baby's getting sick or being treated — and yet which, 
as we have seen, had everything to do with both : The family was 
poor, they were migrants, and they were Chicanos in Texas. 

THE WAGES OF CONCERN 

That was a piece of our experience in Texas. In Michigan, 1 week 
ago I visited several counties where families from the Lower Rio 
Grande Vallev — some of the same families we had seen in March 
in McAllen — nave been picking the strawberries, are now working 
in the cherries, and soon will begin work Avith the cucumbers and to- 
matoes destined for our tables. 

In several ways life is a bit less harsh for them there. They 
have some work, a food stamp program makes it more likely that 
they land their children may have enough to eat and several counties 



5107 

have programs of medical care. But their housing, in camps main- 
tained by the growers, is often worse than they knew^ in Texas. 

I visited a camp on the Old Mission Peninsula where 17 people 
were living, sleeping, cooking and eating in two rooms 8 oy 18 
feet under a leaking roof. Most importantly, however, the feeling of 
not being at home, of not belonging, of not being a part of the coun- 
ties where they work, or of the country which enjoys the fruits of 
their labor — that feeling is still there. 

Senator Yarborough. When Dr. Egeberg testified before our com- 
mittee on the migrant health bill he had been in the fields of Cali- 
fornia where they have harvested vegetables and fruits. He said, "If 
affluent America, which eats the vegetables and fruits at their table, 
could see the conditions of health of the people picking them and 
the conditions of sanitation in the fields and orchards where they are 
picked, they would not enjoy eating the fruits and vegetables as much, 
if they could see those conditions." 

Dr. Harper. I hope to describe my reaction. 

Senator Yarborough. If you have that later in your statement, 
good. 

Dr. Harper. The efforts of the State of Michigan and of many vol- 
untary organizations to improve the migrants' lot are at this time, even 
last w^eek when I wms there, being actively opposed by those who 
control most aspects of the migrants' lives, the growers. 

The facts are simple. Federal and State housing codes set standards 
for migrant camps which must be met before a camp can be licensed 
to receive migrant-tenants. A federally funded program sponsors law 
students who act as leg^al advocates for the migrants in housing and 
other areas. By reporting alleged violations of the codes to a county 
health department, a law student earned the wrath of a grower who 
regarded such action (not only legal but sponsored by the Govern- 
ment) as a challenge to his right to run "his" camps and make a profit 
from the work of "his" migrants as he wished. 

The night before I arrived in Michigan this grower, finding the 
student in question in one of his camps, where he was visiting friends 
who were tenants there, assaulted him physically. When the student 
escaped with his friends, leaving his car, the grower broke all the 
windows in the car with a steel pipe. The atmosphere the next day 
was tense : "For the first time in 5 years," said one veteran of the 
migrant programs, "I'm afraid someone is going to get killed." 

The next day I got a taste of the same treatment. I was speaking 
to migrants at the side of a road, on the edge of a camp, w^hen a grower 
drove up and ordered me off the premises. He boasted that he had 
known within 3 minutes of my 'arrival, via a fleet of cars with two-way 
radios which the growers maintain for surveillance, that a stranger 
was visiting one of his camps. He accused me of trying to ruin his 
business by "snooping" among the workers, and threatened me with 
physical harm should I make any more visits to "his" migrants' camps 
without his approval. "If those do-gooders come on any of my land," 
he said, "they're never going to make it back to Lansing." 

Senator Yarborough. What State was that in ? 

Dr. Harper. That was Michigan. 

The attitudes of these rough-and-ready growers toward the workers 
on whose labor their profits depend, and will continue to depend, de- 



5108 

spite their headlong and much-touted rush to mechanized harvesting — 
"We won't need all these hands a year or two from now," they argue, 
with the self-appointed plausibilit}- characteristic of the man trying to 
justify the saving of money at the expense of human health or dignity, 
"and so why should we invest a lot of money in housing for them 
now?" — are the same as the committee has heard before, and will hear 
again today and tomorrow from the dominant classes in Texas and 
Florida. 

All of these attitudes serve one selfish purpose : to absolve the grower 
of any responsibility for the obvious and infamous short life expec- 
tancy and apathy Avhich are the migrant's share of the American way 
of life. The grower will be absolved, of course, if the migrant can be 
successfully banished from the circle of our sympathy for such is the 
outcome of prejudice, whether racial, cultural or economic. In the case 
of Chicano migrants in Michigan, of course, it is all three. 

To serve such a purpose, the migrants are dismissed as slovenly. 
"They live like animals," say growers who give them shacks to live in. 

Or again, the growers tell us, "The migrants like to travel. They 
like to drive around and see the country^, to get out of the heat of 
Texas in the summer, to come up to the Midwest to swim." Migrants, 
of course, can be found ^vho will say they like to travel, but too many 
mothers show despair as they tell of having to take children out of 
school in early May, to begin again only in November, to believe the 
myth of the happy gypsy. How that myth can withstand the image 
of 33 people and their belongings traveling 1,500 miles in an enclosed 
truck, with children who need rest stops every 45 minutes, to pick 
cherries for $8 a day, is a wonder of public relations beyond my 
comprehension. 

Or the migrants, they say, are deadbeats. "I've seen one mail a money 
order for $500 to Texas the same day he buys $100 worth of food 
stamps," complains a grower whose indignation at the spectacle of 
Groverimient subsidies does not extend to the payments he and his 
fellow growers do not hesitate to cultivate. 

With the migrants excluded by all these devices from the range of 
their sympathies, growers are able to indulge in self-pity. They nave 
a huge personal sense of grievance, of being put upon, of not getting 
what they believe they are entitled to, but the scale of these grievances 
can only be called grotesque compared to the wasted bodies, destroyed 
spirits and shortened lives which are the migrants' lot. 

One complains, "With what I've got invested and what I could earn 
on niy own, shouldn't I be getting $60,000 a jear, not just $40,000"? 

With such an acute sense of personal grievance, a grower may 
have little sympathy left over for those around him. "Babies die all 
the time," says one grower w^hen asked about a notorious case of a 
9-month-old who died last year of diarrhea and dehydration, after 
being refused admission to a hospital in southwest Michigan. "Why 
should they get so excited when one dies here ?" 

From this testimony and that presented today from Texas, a picture 
emerges of the channel in which the migrant stream flows from Texas 
to the Middle West : It is a hard journey through a land where money 
and profit move men's hearts more than does human misery, and 
where all kinds of self-serving rationalizations and spurious slurs on 
the migrants themselves seek to conceal the fundamental facts of 



5109 

human poverty and need, and justify indifference to them or support 
active interference with those who come to act on the migrant's behalf. 
The kind of information the self-syled vigilantes would keep us 
from gathering, and the kind of tragedies which mark the migrant's 
travels are illustrated by the following case history. 

AN IRRITABLE BABY 

In Traverse City I learned from a young father of the illness last 
month of his 3-month-old son. While traveling through Indiana en 
route to Michigan, where his family would begin the strawberry sea- 
son, this baby developed diarrhea, fed poorly, and became irritable. 
Diarrhea and poor feeding are common pediatric symptoms especially 
in the chicano population, where infantile gastroenteritis still ac- 
counts, as it did one generation ago in the population at large, for the 
largest part of infant mortality. 

This very month, when the rest of the country has been congratu- 
lating itself on the fact that no one died last year from poliomyelitis, 
the most serious of the enteric viral infections, three deaths from polio 
have occurred in south Texas. In the absence of immunization, polio 
has the same epidemiology, the same relation to poor sanitation, as the 
less dramatic forms of viral diarrhea. 

Unprotected outhouses, homes without plumbing, contaminated 
water supplies, and fields without toilet facilities explain the f rec[uency 
of these diseases. Poor nutrition^ — the protein and vitamin deficiencies 
we have rejwrted — and lack of adequate care account for the death 
rate in the easily treated simple diarrheas. 

But the other complaint, irritability, is one that gives everj' doctor 
pause, because of the possibility of meningitis. Small babies often do 
not show the physical findings, like stiff neck or resistance of flexion 
of the leg, which we look for when adults have infections of the men- 
inges, and often the characteristic sign in infants, the bulging fontanel 
or soft spot is absent despite the presence of infection. 

To make the diagnosis, therefore, the doctor has to be suspicious, 
to size up the baby as a whole — asking "Does he look sick?" — and per- 
form a spinal tap whenever there is any doubt at all. Anyone who has 
taken care of children has agonized over this decision many times, for 
the disease, despite the terror it strikes into parents' hearts, is treat- 
able. The days of intravenous therapy with the appropriate antibiotics 
usually will save a 3-month-old baby who would otherwise die. 

In this case, however, before a doctor had a chance to consider this 
diagnosis, another hurdle had to be crossed : the father had to pay. 
At the beginning of the season there was only enough money to get 
to the fields in Michigan, and the father and the hospital people 
argued about money. In the end, a nurse gave the father an oral 
medicine to give the baby, and they went out, no doctor having seen the 
child. 

They returned the next night, the baby listless and febrile, and he 
was admitted. Even so, the father said, no doctor saw the baby for 
several hours and when the diagnosis was made then, it was indeed 
meningitis. Intensive therapy was begun, but the baby went on to die. 

The father spoke this way : 

You've got to leave a downpayment before you even leave the baby there. 
But he was sick, man, he was going to die. His mother, she suffered a lot. You 



5110 

know, we come over here to help these folks out with the crops, and we help 
a lot, picking cherries and planting tomatoes, but they don't help us. And 
sometimes we need some help, too. That doctor didn't do anything. He knew the 
baby was going to die. and he didn't want to waste the money. I like white 
people, black people, but I don't know, man, I don't know. I went to the welfare 
oflBce and said, "If my son survives, I won't have the money to get him out." 
And they said, "Sorry, we can't help you. You have to live here 2 or 3 years, 
then we will help you." 

And you know, when they die, man, they are going to pay that, ^^^len they 
go upstairs, they are going to pay, man, they are going to pay. 

How does one react to a story like that ? In McAllen with all of 
our group I was overwhelmed by what we saw and heard. The shock 
anyone would feel in such circumstances, watching an endless stream 
of people in pain, sick, crippled physically and emotionally, and 
drowned in apathy or bitterness or even one heartbreaking individ- 
ual, like the 13-year-old boy I saw who had gone blind in Texas 
over several years without ever being properly evaluated or offered 
any rehabilitation, that shock was doubled because as a doctor I saw 
how much of what I saw was preventable. How man^ times I have 
treated and seen cured patients with the same conditions as we saw 
there, but who would not — because they happened to have money or 
just happened to be living in Boston — would not grow deaf be- 
cause there was no medicine for their chronic otitis, or get dehydrated 
and die because there was no doctor nearby who would treat their 
diarrhea, or just endure a life of pain for want of analgesia, or 
anxiety for want of any medical comfort or pharmacologic relief. 

That is why I have presented these cases in the medical detail I 
have, to share with you the waste and horror a doctor feels seeing 
treatable diseases go, untreated, their crippling way. 

After the initial shock, back in Boston, the mind strains every 
faculty to repress the shock, to blur over the agony, because you can't 
live with those perceptions all the time and sleep well. And if the mere 
perception does that to us, imagine what the living of it does to the 
migrant. The invisibility of the migrants nationally, our ignorance of 
them as they travel among us and load our tables with fruits and vege- 
tables in abundance undreamed of two generations ago, is, like all such 
ignorance, as Gunner Myrdal has said, opportunistic. It is how we 
keep going. 

Senator Yarborough. I think that is something well said, pointing 
out we didn't have this abundance of fruits and vegetables in this 
Nation two generations ago. Apples in many middle-class families were 
something you had at Thanksgiving and Christmas and not normally 
each day of the year. 

I think this abundance makes this deprivation of the workers more 
tragic. 

Dr. Harper. But if you can hold on to this vision, or be refreshed 
by rereading your notes, or looking at the slides once again, or review- 
ing it all, as we have preparing for these hearings, with the friends 
and colleagues with whom we shared the experiences originally, the 
meaning of the migrants' lives is unmistakable. Our country, the 
system, the way things are, or, to drop the depersonalized dodge — all 
of us — build the highways and the rockets and the bombs, pay for 
empty fields and subsidies to the rich, but have not, will not or can- 
not guarantee children in our midst the elements of growth — food, 
health, and hope. 



5111 

Human needs, for those outside of our affluence, fall far down our 
unstated list of national priorities. The pyramid of institutionalized 
selfishness we call our national system cannot by the farthest stretch 
of the imagination be considered to maximize human w^elfare, despite 
the propaganda with which we surround ourselves. For as we do so 
unto the least of these, we used to say. 

The realization of this fact takes a strong cold grip on reality, a 
grip hard to maintain in comfortable caucus rooms like this or in the 
insulation which seems to cut this Capital off from other parts of the 
country ; and it is hard in our hospitals, where we keep busy helping 
those w^ho make it to the door. Terrible is the seductive power, to para- 
phrase Brecht, of that goodness which we do. 

What does one do with such a perception? If it is correct that the 
diseases we have described come from the facts of poverty, migration 
to find work, and racial discrimination, and that a culture valuing 
property more than people is the ultimate barrier to changing these 
pathogenic factors, one can either become a prophet of the apocalypse 
— which is the perception behind the disaffection of young people sup- 
posedly being studied now, or one may despair completely of change, 
which is the nihilistic possibility. 

If, however, one is disinclined emotionally or politically to both 
revolution and resignation, then the only answer is to enfranchise the 
migrants with that one item for which the rest of the country seems 
to respect people — money. Of the practical means for achieving that — 
the organization of the agriculture workers — the subcommittee is 
well aware. 

But I would say in closing, that if the only way to insure simple 
dignity, self-respect, and health for our brothers is to wait until they 
can buy their way into a place in our national sun, that is a terribly sad 
commentary on the moral economy of our country. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [Applause.] 

Senator Mondale. Thank you. Dr. Harper, for a most moving 
statement. It is unfortunate that the printed hearing record will not 
show that we have a packed, standing-room-only hearing room, and 
that most everybody has been sitting in an emotional daze, listening to 
the eloquent recital of facts, figures, statistics, and conclusions docu- 
menting, as perhaps never before, the extreme tragedy of this situa- 
tions. Doctors Wheeler, Lipscomb, and Harper have performed a 
great public service. 

Senator Yarborough ? 

Senator Yarborough. I have no questions at this hour, Mr. Chair- 
man. We have other witnesses and it is nearly 1 o'clock. I want to 
thank Dr. Harper for his study, his actually going into the fields and 
orchards of Michigan and Texas and other States to study this and for 
the great sociological analysis he has given in this paper. In addition 
to being a factual report of the incidence of disease and lack of care, he 
has gone into the deeper psychological and social bases and the mores 
of the American people to an extent that it is a great contribution 
here. 

I just wish that 204 million people could have heard it. 

Senator Mondale. Senator Saxbe ? 

Senator Saxbe. I want to thank Dr. Harper. I think his observa- 
tions and contributions here should be evidence that there is a sub- 



5112 

stantial o^roup of yoiino^ doctors who are interested in correcting these 
problems. I hope that they don't become distracted and forget this as 
they go on down tlie road. 

I know that th.e attractions of pediatric practice in a large city are 
great. I just hope that you will dedicate yourself, when you go into 
practice, to patients in such poverty areas and make a contribution 
to them. 

Senator Moxdale. Thank you, Senator. 

First of all, permit me to express my deepest appreciation to this 
panel and to your colleagues for undertaking this long overdue, but 
extraordinarily compelling, survey. You can argue a great deal about 
the plight of the migrants. You can't argue about the scientific findings 
of doctors who have examined the sick and the hungry. 

I would like to come away from this hearing with a sense of hope 
that things are going to happen about the outrageous, immoral treat- 
ment of human beings. The truth of it is that hearings like this, public 
presentations like this, have occurred time and time again. Instead, I 
think we enjoy feeling sick and morose over the problems of the dis- 
advantaged to the point that they are becoming deeply resentful when 
we even come to talk to them, because they say, "Here they come 
again." 

The established American society has worn out the grass in every 
one of those barrios in every one of our reservations, in our ghettos 
talking to the disadvantaged. We have seen it all. 

There is no mystery to any of this any more. Out of all of this 
comes a theme that wherever you find the powerless, you find a tragi- 
cally disadvantaged people. The details vary but the results are the 
same : rotten insensitive education, inadequate or nonexistent health 
services, lack of unions, no right to speak up, poor law enforcement, 
substandard and unsafe housing, often racism, and many other things. 

The capacity of our society to mangle people who lack the power 
to stand up for their own rights is virtually limitless. I think that 
we must not pursue the old strategy of assuming that another pater- 
nalistic program is going to work. Somehow the disadvantaged have 
to be empowered with a right to speak for themselves, they must be 
empowered with the right to do for themselves, and those rights must 
be given, not as a hoax, but without repressive government program 
interference, because that is how we made it. 

I think that is the only way they are going to make it, whether it 
is the power of the dollar bill that gets them into clinic or hospital, or 
whether it is political power to gain access to the school board and to 
the other public bodies, that deal with the problems of the Mexican- 
American, or the problems of the Indians, or special problems of the 
other disadvantaged, many of whom are white. 

We can no longer assume that simply because we have a moment 
of outrage to inhuman, immoral treatment that much action or power 
to the poor will flow from that understanding. The migrant has been 
accustomed to the syndrome of the traveling liberal now for 50 years. 
Many of them said they were very grateful to some of our most recent 
tours, because they had not been visited since Eleanor Roosevelt or 
since John Steinbeck or since Edward R. Murrow. 

But the conditions are the same, the problems are the same, the 
human tragedy is the same. It is very nice for us to talk about it. But 



5113 

in the lives of these millions who suffered and died in the past, and 
who live now it is the unutterable tragedy which you have defined. 
Somehow our institutions and somehow American attitudes have to be 
jolted so that we realize the very real limitation of paternalistic "good 
works," so that we are willing to permit the disadvantaged to have 
those tools, those rights, those funds, necessary to speak up for them- 
selves, without which our lives, too, would be miserable. 

I thank this panel for describing in ways that cannot be argued the 
damage and destruction and the debt we visit upon hunndreds of 
thousajids of fellow Americans who lack that capacity to speak for 
themselves. 

Senator Saxbe. Don't you feel that we the people who consume the 
products — the cucumbers, strawberries, the sweet corn — that we con- 
tribute to this; and if we cannot enjoy these things without the ex- 
ploitation of people, that maybe we should do without? Do you get 
that feeling as you go through these fields ? 

Dr. Wheeler. I sort of do. Senator. The people we have been talk- 
ing about today make it possible for us to enjoy a standard of living 
and diet that we have not been accustomed to in past years. Although 
I am certain that the growers and the farmers have their very definite 
and real problems in producing their crops and marketing them, the 
fact that they say they have to pay the kind of wages they do and 
provide the kind of living conditions they do to produce this crop 
and get it to the table of the average American is absolutely no excuse 
for the kind of things we have described to you today. 

We must find ways to make it possible to have that food and that 
fruit we need, but not at the expense of human being. I am sure ways 
can be found to do that. 

Senator Moxdale. I am advised that Ave have a live quorum call on 
the Senate floor. It is now 1 o'clock. If Dr. Love's schedule permits, 
we will reconvene at 2 o'clock. 

Once again I thank you and I thank your colleagues. I thank the 
foundation for its work and I would like to include at this point in 
the record a statement by Dr. Senn of Yale University, who also speaks 
very effectively on this same problem. 

(The prepared statement of Dr. Senn follows :) 

Prepared Statement of Dr. Milton J. E. Senn, Yale University. 
New Haven, Conn. 

My concern is with tlie long-term effects of nutritional and p.sychological 
deprivation. Studies of people who are underfed show that this leads to starva- 
tion and malnutrition, even death. Inadequately fed pregnant women give birth 
to babies who are undersized, have an inadequate development of the central 
nervous system ; and if the underfeeding persi.sts, this leads to a predisiwsition 
of other diseases, especially infections, and to a variety of deficiency diseases 
involving the skin, the mouth and teeth, the hair, and a variety of internal 
organs. 

.There are at least three ways in which inadequate nutrition impairs learn- 
ing. The first, is through a direct effect on the developing nervous system in 
utero and in the postnatal and weaning periods. Such impairment of growth 
and differentiation of the central nervous .sy.stem is disturbed in a way that 
is not corrected by feeding at later ages. The second way. in which nutrition 
affects child learning is by making him susceptible to infections, again with 
some possibility of central nervous system damage. Thirdly, malnutrition af- 
fects learning l)y interfering with the energy levels, the level of attention ; and 
a direct consequence of this is a diminution in the number of days of school 
attendance, often leading to school drop out. 



5114 

Underfeeding also leads directly to the development of behavior problems, 
some of which may be classified as anti-social acts and delinquency. 

In examining the families in Texas, I was impressed with the number of 
complaints from the adults about backaches, headaches, abdominal pain, and 
lassitude. A number talked about being chronically depressed and discour- 
aged. I do not think it too farfetched to consider these conditions psychoso- 
matic illnesses, directly ascribable to the living and working conditions of the 
patients. 

I conclude, that malnutrition and other conditions of health represent inter- 
generational or transgenerational problems. The degree to which a child is 
at risk in health, and in psychological development, must be considered not 
only in terms of the contemporary circumstance.s in which he is living and the 
details of his own history, but also within the context of his parents' physical 
status and their own developmental and psychological histories. The relation- 
ship this is cyclical and intergenerational. There is a contagiousness of the 
spirit and anxiety and hopelessness from parent to child as well as a contagion 
of infectious disease. 

Physicians as well as those other people, such as members of Congress, who 
are concerned with the health of our people, must then be concerned not merely 
with change in a given generation, but with the intergenerational influences on 
health. Malnutrition is not a crisis phenomenon in Texas among the migrant 
workers. It has become a condition of life ; stable, persistent, pervasive, ever 
endangering the health of scores of people. What we must develop are means of 
implementing our concern by remedial and preventive measures which will affect 
all facets of health, across the generations, in order to assure subsequent genera- 
tions of being free of the serious ills now overpowering members of this 
generation. 

Effects of Deprivation (Nutritional, Psychological) in Pregnancy, 
Infancy and Early Childhood 

1. Nutritional deprivation : 

Underfeeding : 

Starvation and malnutrition. 

Death. 

Growth retardation. 

Inadequate development, especially CNS. 
Inadequate feeding : 

Vitamin, protein, mineral deficiencies. 

Many Deficiency Diseases. 

Predisposition to other diseases, especially infections. 
Overfeeding : Obesity. 

2. Psychological deprivation : 

Underfeeding : 
Hunger. 
Intellectual impairment : 

School learning problems. 

School drop-out. 

Poor work records. 
Behavior problems : 

Anti-social acts. 

Delinquency. 
Mental Illness : 

Psychosomatic illness. 

Depressions. 

Drug abuse. 

Senator Yarborough. Gentlemen, you have made a great contribu- 
tion. I want to say to you, don't despair, because I believe as a result 
of the forces that have talked for 30 years, action is coming and 
coming very fast. This is an idea that has been talked about for 30 
years. 

I think it is an idea whose time has come. There are many factors 
moving for it. I mentioned the election of just two county judges in 
Texas, the greatest educational opportunities among the minority 



5115 

groups themselves in the field of law and political science under the 
cold war GI bill. They served most, they are entitled to go to school. 

They are now developing a corps of their own lawyers. In 1958 
we had 2.75 million students in college in America. Now it is eight 
million with one great deficiency. We have not increased the medical 
education percentagewise. It should have gone up at the same level, 
but medical education has been retarded insofar as numbers of people 
obtaining it about as much as these farmworkers. 

We just haven't permitted the students of America to go to Ameri- 
can schools. Over 20 percent of our interns in hospitals are graduates 
of foreign medical schools. Over 30 percent of the residents in hos- 
pitals are graduates of foreign medical schools. 

We have denied American young men and women the opportunity 
to get the American education that would let them treat the ill of 
America. As Dr. Harper said, it is going to take more than just the 
medical doctors out there to treat these people. It is going to take 
more than nurses. The country seems to respect most, he says, money. 

We have to get money in their pockets. I think the country is moving 
to that and moving very, very fast. I don't think, Senator, we will sit 
here another 30 years or 10 years or 5 years. I think that for whoever 
is around that this idea has come and this kind of shame of America 
has to be lifted as a blight from this land. 

Senator Mondale. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your most 
compelling testimony. 

Without objection, I order printed in the hearing record the full text 
of Dr. Harper's remarks, along with a report on his visit to the Con- 
necticut River Valley. 

(The information referred to follows:) 

Prepared Statement of Gordon Harper, M.D., Training in Pediatrics, Boston, 

Mass. 

My name is Gordon Harper. I am a physician, in the second year of pediatric 
training in Boston. I participated in the March trip to McAllen, Texas, and, 
because the Northerner sojourning and muckraking in the South is legitimately 
suspect in both Southern and Northern eyes, I have since visited other areas 
where migrants live and work in Connecticut and Michigan. 

Much testimony has already been presented about the number of patients we 
saw in McAllen, the kinds of diseases they presented, and how these conditions 
arise from poverty and discrimination. I would like to present a particular case 
to illustrate what we are talking about. 

A BABY WITH CELLULITIS 

The first day we were working in Dr. Casso's clinic, a young mother from 
Pharr brought in a baby, perhaps a year and a half old, complaining that his 
head and neck were swollen. He had been well, she told us, until three days 
previously, when insect bites on his scalp became infected. During the succeed- 
ing days, the infection spread and the baby grew less active and was not eating 
well. He developed a fever and now just lay about, showing no interest in those 
around him. Examining the baby, we found him well developed and fairly well 
nourished, but acutely ill, "toxic" as we say, lying motionless on the examining 
table. His temperature was 106°, his pulse was rapid and his respirations labored. 
One side of his scalp and neck was red-hot, swollen, and weeping. Huge lymph 
nodes were palpable in the adjacent areas. Pustules in his scalp, the likely loca- 
tion of the insect bites to which the mother referred, seemed to be the source of 
the infection. This was cellulitis, a bacterial infection of the skin and subcutane- 
ous tissues, with probably spread of the infection throughout the baby's body — 
sepsis. We had a very sick baby on our hands. 



5116 

What had this infection to do with migrant labor? First of all, it began 
with insect bites, a familiar summer affliction for all of us, but much more 
common among children who live in substandard housing. In Texas, all of us 
s?aw windows without screening, open latrines, inadequate garbage disposal, 
standing water, and gaping holes in floors and walls. We saw carrot chips used 
as ground cover — garbage in the front .vard. In Michigan I visited a migrant 
camp, near the Aunt Jane Pickle Factor.v, a Borden subsidiary, built literall.v 
right next to a municipal sewage pool and garbage dump. The stench was 
suffocating. On all these conditions, in.sects and rodents thrive and attack chil- 
dren playing or sleeping nearby. Moreover, once expo.sed to such bites, babies 
are much harder to keep clean, and the bites are more likely to be infected, if 
homes have no running water. Not surprisingly, then, both in Texas and Michi- 
gan, infected bites are one of the most frequent conditions found in migrant 
children, directly related to the conditions they must live in. And so was this 
baby's initiall.v trivial infection. 

Secondly, the infection, developing over two days, received no medical atten- 
tion until the mother came to us on the third day. Sui>erflcial skin infections 
are common problems of children in Boston or Washington as In Texas, especially 
when the weather is warm as it is most of the year in the Rio Grande Valley. 
Treated promptly, with good cleansing, a clean dressing, and antibotics as indi- 
cated, such an infection should never reach the proportions we found in Mc- 
AUen. But we learned there, as you are hearing today, how seldom poor people 
there see doctors. A visit to a private doctor can cost $10, plus charges for medi- 
cines. Dr. Casso has been one of the few physicians in McAUen who would see 
patients who could not pay, and we have seen under what a heavy case load he 
functions. This mother, like so many, knew of no free dispensary ; there was no 
outpatient department or free emergency ward like those which we take for 
granted in the rest of the coimtry. to which she could go. And the mother was 
reluctant to travel to Mexico, where many obtain cheai>er and more sympa- 
thetic care, with a baby so ill. I would like you all to understand how it was 
very diflRcult for us to believe, as this mother had long since learned, that there 
was no place, convenient and close by, where she could take her baby when he 
was sick and she had no money. That is how a minor infection became a life- 
threatening one. 

The third part of this baby's case now unfolds: what could we do about it? 
Again, in any of the emergency wards where we have worked, where we have 
been on hand to treat whoever came in, without asking who could pay or how 
much any indicated therap.v would cost, this baby would have been hospitalized 
and antibiotic therapy begun without delay. But in McAUen we had to ask who 
could pa.v. The answer was that there is no Medicaid program in Texas for those 
not already covered under categorical welfare programs, that there are no free 
beds in the local hospital only one block away, and that a deposit is required for 
a patient's admission to that hospital. Man.v people in McAllen, as we will docu- 
ment, have been told after the birth of a child in hospital : "You pay the bill or 
we keep the baby." What did we do? The baby received antipyretics and a large 
intramuscular injection of antibiotics and was observed for six hours in the 
oflBce. He then looked much better, was given another dose, and was sent home to 
return next day. This therapy, good bush medicine dictated by exi)ediency, 
"worked"' this time, but is hard to justify one block from a general hospital, the 
McAllen General Hospital. 

Every parent of a critically ill child, faced with a disease beyond the control 
of aspirin and cough syrup, feels helpless and alone ; for this baby's mother, how- 
ever, such helplessness was compounded by three facts equally beyond her 
control, which should have had nothing to do with her baby's getting sick or being 
treated — and yet which, as we have .seen, had everything to do with both : the 
family was poor, they were migrants, and they were Chicanos in Texas. 

THK WAGES OF CONCERN 

That was a piece of our experience in Texas. In Michigan, one week ago, I 
visited several counties where families from the Lower Rio Grande Valley — some 
of the same families we had seen in March in McAllen — have l)een picking the 
strawberries, are now working in the cherries, and so(m will begin work with 
the cucumbers and tomatoes destined for our tal)les. In several wa.vs, life is a bit 
le.ss harsh for them there : they have .some work ; a food stamp i)rogram makes it 
more likely that they and their children may have enough to eat and several 
counties have programs of medical care. But their housing, in camps maintained 



5117 

by the growers, is often worse than they knew in Texas ; I visited a camp on the 
Old Mission Penninsula where 17 people were living, sleeping, cooking and eating 
in two rooms 8 by 18 feet under a leaking roof. Most importantly, however, the 
feeling of not being at home, of not belonging, of not being a part of the counties 
where they work, or of the country which enjoys the fruits of their labor — that 
feeling is still there. 

The efforts of the state of Michigan and of many voluntary organizations to 
improve the migrants' lot is at this time, even last week when I was there, being 
actively opposed by those who control most asiiects of the migrants' lives, the 
growers. The facts are simple. Federal and state housing codes set standards 
for migrant camps which must be met before a camp can be licensed to receive 
migrant-tenants. A federally funded program sponsors law students who act as 
legal advocates for the migrants in housing and other areas. By reporting alleged 
violations of the codes to a county health department, a law student earned the 
wrath of a grower Avho regarded such action (not only legal but sponsored by 
the government) as a challenge to his right to run "his" camps and make a profit 
from the work of "his" migrants as he wished. The night before I arrived in 
Michigan this grower, finding the student in question in one of his camps, where 
he was visiting friends who were tenants there, assaulted him physically. When 
the student escaped with his friends, leaving his care, the grower broke all the 
windows in the car with a steel pipe. The atmosphere the next day was tense : 
"For the first time in five years," said one veteran of the migrant programs, "I'm 
afraid someone's going to get killed." 

The next day I got a taste of the same treatment. I was speaking to migrants 
at the side of a road, on the edge of a camp, when a grower drove up and ordered 
me off the premises. He boasted that he had know^l within three minutes of my 
arrival via a fleet of cars with two-way radios which the growers maintain for 
surveillance, that a stranger Avas visiting one of his camps. He accused me of 
trying to ruin his business by "snooping" among the workers, and threatened me 
with physical harm should I make anj' more visits to "his" migrants' camps 
without his approval. "If those do-gooders come on any of my land," he said, 
"they're never going to make it back to Lansing." 

Tlie attitudes of these rough-and-ready growers toward the workers on whose 
labor their profits depend, and will continue to dei>end, despite their headlong 
and much touted rush to mechanized harvesting ("We won't need all these hands 
a year or two from now," they argue, with the self-appointed plausibility charac- 
teristic of the man trying to justify the saving of money at the expense of human 
health or dignity ; "And so why should we invest a lot of money in housing for 
them now?" are the same as the committee has heard before, and will hear again 
today and tomorrow, from the dominant classes in Texas and Florida. All of 
these attitudes serve one selfish purpose: to absolve the grower of any respon- 
sibility for the obvious and infamous short life expectancy and apathy which are 
the migrant's share of the American way of life. The grower will be absolved, of 
course, if the migrant can be successfully banished from the circle of our sym- 
pathy for such is the outcome of prejudice, whether racial, cultural, or eco- 
nomic in the case of Chicano migrants in Michigan, of course, it is all three. 

To serve such a purpose, the migrants are dismissed as slovenly. "They live like 
animals," say growers who give them shacks to live in. 

Or again, the growers tell us, "The migrants like to travel ; they like to drive 
around and see the country, to get out of the heat of Texas in the summer, to 
come up to the Midwest to swim." Migrants, of coiirse, can be found who will say 
they like to travel, but too many mothers show despair as they tell of having 
to take children out of school in early May, to begin again only in November, 
to believe the myth of the happy gypsy. How that myth can withstand the 
image of 33 people and their belongings traveling 1500 miles in an enclosed truck, 
with children who need rest stops every 45 minutes, to pick cherries for eight 
dollars a day. is a wonder of public relations beyond my comprehension. 

Or the migrants, they say, are deadbeats. "I've seen one mail a money order 
for $500 to Texas the same day he buys $100 worth of food stamps." complains 
a grower whose indignation at the spectacle of government subsidies does not 
extend to the payments he and his fellow growers do not hesitate to cultivate. 
With the migrants excluded by all these devices from the range of their 
sympathies, growers are able to indulge in self-pity ; they have a huge personal 
sense of grievance, of being put upon, of not getting what they believe they are 
entitled to. but the scale of these grievances can only be called grotesque com- 
pared to the wasted bodies, destroyed sipirits, and shortened lives which are 

36-513 O— 71— Pt. 8-A -10 



5118 

the migrants' lot. One complains, "With what I've got invested, and what I 
could earn on my own, shouldn't I be getting $60,000 a year, not just $40,000?" 

With such an acute sense of personal grievance, a grower may have little 
sympathy left over for those around him. "Babies die all the time," says one 
grower, when asked about a notorious case of a nine-month-old who died last 
year of diarrhea and dehydration, after being refused admission to a hospital in 
Southwest Michigan ; "why should they get so excited when one dies here?" 

From this testimony and that presented today from Texas, a picture emerges 
of the channel in which the migrant stream flows from Texas to the Middle 
West : it is a hard journey through a land where money and profit move men's 
hearts more than does human misery, and where all kinds of self-serving ration- 
alizations and spurious slurs on the migrants themselves seek to conceal the 
fundamental facts of human poverty and need, and justify indifference to them 
or support active interference with those who come to act on the migrant's behalf. 

The kind of information the self-styled vigilantes would keep us from gather- 
ing, and the kind of tragedies which mark the migrant's travels, are illustrated by 
the following case history. 

AN IRRITABLE BABY 

In Traverse City, I learned from a young father of the illness last month of 
his three-month-old son. While traveling through Indiana enroute to Michigan, 
where his family would begin the strawberry season, this baby developed di- 
arrhea, fed poorly, and became irritable. Diarrhea and poor feeding are common 
pediatric symptoms, especially in the Chicano population, where infantile gas- 
troentitis still accounts, as it did one generation ago in the population at large, 
for the largest part of infant mortality. This very month, when the rest of the 
country has been congratulating itself on the fact that no one died last year from 
poliomyelitis, the most serious of the enteric viral infections, three deaths from 
polio have occurred in South Texas. In the absence of immunization, polio has 
the same epidemology, the same relation to poor sanitation, as the less dramatic 
forms of viral diarrhea. The unprotected outhouses, homes without plumbing, 
contaminated water supplies, and fields without toilet facilities already men- 
tioned explain the frequency of these diseases ; poor nutrition — the protein and 
vitamin deficiencies we have reported — and lack of adequate care account for 
the death rate in the easily treated simple diarrhea. But the other complaint, 
irritability, is one that gives every doctor pause, because of the possibility of 
meningitis. Small babies often do not show the physical findings, like stiff neck 
or resistance of flexion of the leg. which we look for when adults have infections 
of the meninges, and often the charact-eristic sign in infants, the bulging fontanel 
or soft spot, is absent despite the presence of infection. To make the diagnosis, 
therefore, the doctor has to be suspicious, to size up the baby as a whole, (asking, 
"Does he look sick?") and perform a spinal tap whenever there is any doubt at 
all. Anyone who's taken care of children has agonized over this decision many 
times, for the disease, despite the terror it strikes into parents' hearts, is treat- 
able. Ten days of intravenous therapy with the appropriate antibiotics usually 
will save a three-month-old baby who would otherwise die. 

In this case, however, before a doctor had a chance to consider this diagnosis, 
another hurdle had to be crossed : the father had to pay. At the beginning of 
the season, there was only enough money to get to the fields in Michigan, and the 
father and the hospital people argued about money. In the end, a nurse gave 
the father an oral medicine to give the baby, and they went out, no doctor having 
seen the child. They returned the next night, the baby listless and febrile, and 
he was admitted. Even so, the father said, no doctor saw the baby for several 
hours and when the diagnosis was made then, it was indeed meningitis. Intensive 
therapy was begun, but the baby went on to die. 
The father spoke this way : 

You've got to leave a down payment before you even leave the baby 
there; but he was sick, man he was going to die. His mother, she suffered 
a lot. You know, we come over here to help these folks out with the crops, 
and we help a lot, picking cherries, and planting tomatoes, but they don't 
help us. And sometimes we need some help, too. That doctor didn't do any- 
thing, he knew the baby was going to die, and he didn't want to waste the 
money. I like white people, black people, but I don't know, man, I don't 
know. What do they care about, just money? They don't care about us. I 



5119 

went to the Welfare OflBce and said, "If the kid survives, I won't have the 
money to get him out." And they said, "Sorry, we can't help you. You've 
got to live here two or three years, then we'll help you." I'll tell you some- 
thing, man, I'm not going to that state of Indiana any more ! They don't care 
about anybody. They don't help you at all. And you know, when they die, 
they're going to pay that. When they go upstairs, they're going to pay. 
How does one react to this kind of spectacle? In McAUen, with all of our 
group, I was overwhelmed by what we saw and heard. The shock anyone would 
feel in such circumstances, watching an endless stream of people in pain, sick, 
crippled physically and emotionally, and drowned in apathy or bitterness 
or even one'heartbreaking individual, like the thirteen-year-old boy I saw who 
had gone blind over several years without ever being properly evaluated or 
offered any rehabilitation, that shock was doubled because as a doctor, I saw 
how much of what I saw was preventable : how many times I have treated and 
seen cured patients with the same conditions as we saw there, but who would 
not— because they happened to have money— or just happened to be living in 
Boston, would not grow deaf because there was no medicine for their chronic 
otitis, or get dehydrated and die because there was no doctor nearby who would 
treat their diarrhea, or just endure a life of pain for want of analgesia, or 
anxiety for want of any medical comfort or pharmacologic relief. That's why 
I've presented these cases in the medical detail I have, to share with you the 
waste and horror a doctor feels seeing treatable diseases go, untreated, their 
crippling way. . . ,^ ^ 

After the initial shock, back in Boston, the mind strains every faculty to re- 
press the shock, to blur over the agony, because you can't live with those per- 
ceptions all the time and sleep well. (And if the mere perception does that 
to us, imagine what the living of it does to the migrant ) The invisibility of the 
migrants nationally, our ignorance of them as they travel among us and load 
our tables wth fruits and vegetables in abundance undreamed of two generations 
ago, is, like all such ignorance, as Gunner Myrdal has said ; opportunistic. It's 
how we keep going. 

But if you can hold onto this vision, or be refreshed by re-reading your notes, 
or looking at the slides once again, or reviewing it all, as we have preparing 
for these hearings, with the friends and colleagues with whom we shared the 
experiences originally, the meaning of the migrants' lives is unmistakable ; our 
country, the system, the way things are, or, to drop the depersonalized dodge — 
all of us — build the highways and the rockets and the bombs, pay for empty 
fields and subsidies to the rich, but have not, will not, or cannot guarantee 
children in our midst the elements of growth : food, health, and hope. Human 
needs, for those outside of our affluence, fall far down our unstated list of 
national priorities. The pyramid of institutionalized selfishness we call our 
national system cannot by the farthest stretch of the imagination be considered 
to maximize human welfare, despite the propaganda with which we surround 
ourselves. For as we do so unto the least of these. . . . 

The realization of this fact takes a strong cold grip on reality, a grip hard to 
maintain in comfortable caucus rooms like this or in the insulation which seems 
to cut this capital off from other parts of the country ; and its hard in our 
hospitals, where we keep busy helping those who make it to the door. Terrible 
is the seductive power, to paraphrase Brecht, of that goodness which we do. 

What does one do with such a perception? If it is correct that the diseases 
we have described come from the facts of poverty, migration to find work, and 
racial discrimination, and that a culture valuing property more than people 
is the ultimate barrier to changing these pathogenic factors, one can either 
become a prophet of the apocalypse — which is the perception behind the dis- 
affection of young people supposedly being studied now. Or one may despair 
completely of change, which is the nihilistic possibility. If. however, one is dis- 
inclined emotionally or politically to both revolution and resignation then the 
only answer is to enfranchise the migrants with that one item for which the 
rest of the country seems to respect people : money. Of the practical means for 
achieving that — the organization of the agriculture workers — the subcommitee 
is well aware. 

But I would say in closdng, that if only to ensure simple dignity, self-respect 
and health for our brothers is to wait until they can buy their way into a place 
in our national sun, that is a terribly sad commentary on the moral economy 
of our country. 



5120 

July 20. 1070. 
Hon. Walter P. Moxdale, 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, Committee on Labor and Public 
Welfare, U.S. Senate, M'asliinfjtou, B.C. 
De.\r Senator Moxdale : AttacluHl are my observations after vLsiting the Con- 
necticut River Valley and the labor camps there, where the Puerto Iticans who 
pick the tobacco are housed, fed. and virtually incarcerated. 

Perhaps you would be interested in including this in the hearinsr record of 
the day (m which I appeared with the Field Foundatioii doctors. 
Sincerely. 

GoHDON Harper, M.D. 

Report of Gordon Harper, M.D., Boston, Mass., on His Recent Visit to 
THE Connecticut River Valley 

In the Connecticut River Valley, the Land of the Shade Tobacco 
Growers Association 

Driving from Boston to New York, in the valleys of central Connecticut the 
motorist sees large fields covered with mos(iuito netting which he may or may 
not know are tobacco plants destined for cigarniaking. He probably doesn't 
know that the acreage in tobacco has declined since World War II, as industry 
and suburbia spread over the field, or that most of the labor force, once local 
New Englanders, immigx'ants of children of immigrants — is now recruited sea- 
sonally in I'uerto Rico. Several thousand Puerto Ricans work here from May 
to November. 

The camps they live in are well concealed ; several hours of driving on 
main and side roads, in areas full of tobacco, fail to locate a camp. By asking 
Puerto Ricans in the area one gets directions: to a small town where the 
only sign that several hundred seasonal workers live nearby is a large sign in 
the center of town, in I]nglish, and Spanish : No Loitering, Xo Littering. Thence, 
a mile or so from town up a gravel road to the camp, set in the woods. Behind 
a high chain-link fence one .sees immaculate grounds, with well-trimmed lawn, 
climbing roses, and taW shade trtH's surrounding neatly kept barracks. A huge 
sign warns the passerby that only official cars may enter, that all others 
must stop at the office, and a guard inside the fence enforces the me.«sage, 
grumbling answers to questions and keeping the visitor from entering any 
building. He also discourages workers from speaking to the stranger. 

Placards express the same mood : they say in Spanish : "Danger ! Danger ! 
Danger ! Don't sit on tlie curb. Trucks go by very fast. We are not responsible 
if onyone is hurt." "Don't hang around the office if you have nothing to do ; 
go back to your bunk and rest. Others have work to do." "In the cafeteria, 
take your tray back to where it belongs or else you will be fired." The men 
around the office have got the message : with sideways glances at the office, they 
pass by, or grunt an answer to an inquiry. I can't remember ever being 
in a place where fear so visibly kept men from speaking, but this is what 
I imagine a police state must be like. Only at the liquor store in the nearby 
town is it possible to talk to the men in this camp and get an idea of what 
their lives are like. 

Recruited in Puerto Rico, men come to Connecticut in May for a season 
which will last till November or December. They must come alone, leaving 
wives and children perhaps in nearby Hartford or Springfield, but more likely 
in Puerto Rico. During the season, they have only single days off: visits home 
are impossible. They are paid .$1.7.") \^er hour, from which about $20 are de- 
ducted weekly for room, board, and medical services. "I'd prefer to work in 
Puerto Rico." one told me, "but field work pays only $1.30 there ; I used to 
make good wages in a factory there, but there's no work there now." 

Here, however, they enjoy neither contract nor job security. One man esti- 
mated that of five hundred men beginning the season, only one hundred will 
.still be around in November : others will have been recruited to take the 
plax-es of those whr> have left — either voluntarily, when fed up with the food 
or the isolation, or involuntarily. whcTi fired. Any grievance, real or imagined, 
suffices for dismissal. "You can't do anything here, it's like being in jail," T was 
told. "Yes. like being in a jail." "If anybody talks back or complains about 
the food, he can be fired. Most of the time, though, you never know why some- 
body has been fired ; the next day, the bed's just empty. People are too em- 



5121 

barrassed to tell you what happened." There is no grievance procedure for the 
worker, needless to say ; no opportunity for redress. 

I did not see the camp food about which so many complained, but it's said that 
workers walk more than a mile to the grocery store in town to buy food, trying 
to make up in quality or quantity for what they are offered in camp. 

The only escape from the isolation, oppressive atmosphere, and questionable 
food of the camp is to come to town, buy a beer, and, holding it surreptitiously in 
a paiJer bag, drink it at the side of the road. A sidewalk is the only gathering 
place and even there the state police last year harassed the workers so much 
that liquor sales fell off. Even along the roads to town, they chased the workers 
back up into the camp. This year there has been less harassment, but the feeling 
of being unwelcome still prevails. 

"Can't a man relax a little after a day working in the fields?" the workers asked 
me. "Have a drink and a good time with his friends?" They argued, "You're from 
here, right? Now, if you went to Costa Rica or Venezuela, and didn't know what 
to do or how to behave, and without telling you anything, the police came up and 
started pushing you around for not acting the way they do there, that wouldn't 
be right, would it? Well, why don't they give us a chance?" 

At a time when even the federal government is finally beginning to act to pro- 
tect society's interest in the stability of the family, a work program — the only 
place where men can find work — which takes them away from their families for 
six months of the year is surely nonsense ; it is also punitive and cruel. Equally 
cruel are the conditions which make men feel like prisoners and unwanted 
strangers in the country of which they are citizens. 

One worker told me about the subsidies, loans, and technical assistance which 
he has seen given to Cuban refugees in Puerto Rico : "Why do they give them 
all that money," he asked, "and nothing for us?" "No, you don't understand," 
added his friend, another Puerto Rican. "They have been defeated, so we have 
to help them. It's like Korea or Vietnam, you know. When they're down, you have 
to give a hand." 

Three times as I talked to these men I was asked whether I was from the 
state Department of Labor. They were disappointed when I was not. They said, 
"They should come and see how things are here. Not just with the boss, either ; 
you know what people say then. Come and see how things really are. People get- 
ting fired, terrible food to eat. No rights at all. Sometime they should come here 
and see." 

Senator Moxdale. ^Ye stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 
(Whereupon, at 1 p.m. the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 
2 p.m. of the same day.) 

AFTERNOOlSr SESSION 

(The subcommittee recon\'ened at 2 p.m., Senator Walter F. Mon- 
dale, cha irman of the subcommittee, presiding. ) 

Senator Mondale. We will come to order. 

We are pleased to have Dr. Carl R. Love, president of the Hidalgo 
County Medical Society, McAllen, Tex. 

Senator Yarborough. Since you are a constituent of mine, it gives 
me great pleasure to have the honor of introducing you to the com- 
mittee. You are the president of joint Hidalgo and Starr Counties 
Medical Society ? 

STATEMENT OF CARL R. LOVE, M.D., PRESIDENT, HIDALGO 
COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETY, McALLEN, TEX. 

Dr. Love. Yes, sir. 

Senator Yarborough. It is a great pleasure to welcome you here. 
You are a graduate of Baylor Medical School in Texas ? 

Dr. Love. Xo, sir, I am a graduate of Harvard Medical School. 
I had my postgraduate at Baylor. 

Senator Yarborough. I thought from Dr. Lij)scomb's statement he 
knew you from Baylor. 



5122 

Approximately liow many physicians do you have in Hidalgo 
County ? 

Dr. Love. Yes, I have known Dr. Lipscomb. We have approximately 
88. 

Senator Yarborough. Ai)proximately 88. How about Starr County? 

Dr. LovK. They say five, but probably two or three in active practice. 

Senator Yarborouoh. Thank you very much, Doctor. 

Before turnino; this back to Chairman Mondale to ask you to pro- 
ceed with your statement, I want to say, Cliairman Mondale, you and I 
have been to that county on official hearings. We have been at informal 
inspections at barrios. People call them "colonias" down there. I don't 
Icnow the difference between a ''barrio" and a "colonia,'' but I under- 
stand a barrio was close to a city. 

I won't get into semantics. What do you call them v.-here the migrant 
workers live in the valley? What do the English-speaking people 
call those areas? 

Dr. Love. Colonias. I am not sure I know what a barrio is myself. 
I think it is something like a city, city located. 

Senator Yarborough. In Latin America they call them a name that 
means i^arachutist in English. Mr. Chairman, Hidalgo County, despite 
the absence of any large city from the county, is so ]loa^•ily populated 
Avith small cities and rural areas that it is the ninth most populous 
county in the United States. There is no other county that reaches that 
big without having cities of over 100,000 population. There is a popu- 
lation close to 200,000 in the county. 

Dr. Love. 206,000. 

Senator Yarborough. Over 200,000? 

Dr. Love. Yes, sir. 

Senator Yarborough. ]Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

Senator Moxdale. Dr. Love, you may proceed. 

Dr. Love. Senators, I appreciate the opportunity to be here. As the 
kind Senator Yarborough has stated, I am the current president of 
Hidalgo-Starr Counties Medical Society. I am a graduate of Harvard 
Medical School, postgraduate at southern California and training at 
Baylor Medical School in Houston. I am a diplomat of the American 
Board of Surgery and a fellow of American College of Surgeons. 

I was asked to present to you steps our medical society has taken to 
meet the health needs of farmworkers, the difficulties attendant there- 
to, and our suggested solutions. 

I believe the medical need in our area will be detailed to you by 
other testimony. Suffice it to say that a large segment of our popula- 
tion receives little or no care until a medical disaster occurs, and that 
our situation is somewhat complicated by our proximity to Mexico. 

Kecognizing this, the society has sought and obtained an additional 
amomit of money from tlie migrant health project to operate our out- 
patient clinics in the McAllen and Weslaco hospitals. Our reasons for 
using the hospitals for clinics were several. 

P'irst, it is the only way to virtually guarantee the continued interest 
and support of the majority of physicians in the county, which I 
believe you will agree is desirable Avithout further elaboration. Sec- 
ondly, we liave been able to negotiate an agreement with these hos- 
pitals to furnish space, utilities and housekeeping free, and the use of 
X-ray and laboratory services at cost. This, of course, assures us of 



5123 

quality service with no capital investment, therefore more money for 
actual delivery of services. 

We are hopeful of obtaining additional county (government) sup- 
port. However, these negotiations are at present unsettled. Presently 
the opening of the clinics awaits only crystallization of organizational 
detail, "We, as physicians, are interested in a migrant in need of medical 
care as well as a nonmigrant with need, and therefore have spent con- 
siderable effort to insure availability of services for all the poor. 

I will briefly outline our other activities. The existing County Health 
Department is in sad need of reorganization. This is perhaps best 
exemplified by the recent polio outbreak. We have gained a foothold 
in this area and have every intention of rebuilding it into an efficient 
and competent delivery vehicle better suited to the needs of today. 

We are also taking a look at our educational system. It may be that 
all our local school boards will need to be asked to change their meth- 
ods of teaching hygiene, nutrition, and elementary sanitation. Also, it 
appears to me that the nutritional program may be in need of fresh 
ideas, since their efforts to teach nutrition and sanitation to some of 
our citizens is quite ineffective. 

The problems we have faced have been primarily money and inertia. 
It has been personally gratifying to me to note that once the former 
was overcome, the latter was easy. In point of fact, a snowball effect 
seems to be occurring. 

We are aware that certain deficiencies exist in the foregoing plans. 
However, I think that with experience and determination, tliey can 
be resolved. We are most appreciative of the continued interest of this 
committee, the Baylor Medical School, and Dr. Jim Turpin of Proj- 
ect Concern. 

Our present needs, if you forgive me, are manpower, unification, 
and money. With a physician-patient ratio of 4,000 :1 the need for doc- 
tors is desperate in Hidalgo County. In Starr County it is 10,000:1, 
which is a disaster. The community is literally killing the doctors. 
However, with an active recruitment effort this situation is being 
alleviated somewhat. 

Everybody that knows anybody that is in the medical field starts 
spreading the word that they need doctors. In the past 3 months there 
have been a total of nine new doctors moved to our area. We are how- 
ever, uncertain whether this is a result of our efforts or whether it is 
an accident. 

Unification: I have the distinct feeling that if all Federal, State, 
and local efforts were j^laced under one authority, the resultant savings 
from efficiency would enable us to supply the financial resources neces- 
sary to fulfill our every objective. Comprehensive health planning 
may be the answer. 

Money: Hidalgo and Starr Counties are quite poor. In the near 
term, I beg you to reverse the planned decrease of migrant funds avail- 
able for inpatient hospital care. Said funds are already pitifully inade- 
quate, and are scheduled to diminish. 

Gentlemen, this concludes my formal remarks. Should you desire 
further comment, I am at your service. 

I would like to make one remark to you, Senator Mondale. You 
asked about midwives this morning. I don't know how many babies 
they deliver, but there are 34 practicing midwives in Hidalgo County. 



5124 

Senator Mondale. How equipped are they in ^our opinion? 

Dr. Lo\'E. Very poorly. 

Senator Mondale. Some of them are a positive liazard; are they 
not? 

Dr. Love. I think so. Obstetrics is out of my line, but it would be my 
opinion that they are a hazard. 

Senator Mondale. One of the things tliat we heard al)out in our 
hearings was venereal disease, wliich is going untreated and is result- 
ing in deformed and blind children. Is that a serious problem? 

Dr. Love. I don't think it is a serious problem. It occurs once a 
year in the county. I have no statistics available to me at the present 
time to tell you how prevalent it is. I am sure it is prevalent. 

Senator Mondale. Senator Yarborough do you have any ques- 
tions ? 

Senator Yarborolgii. Mr. Chairman, liefore I connnent, I want to 
thank you, Dr. Love, for taking the time from your busy practice 
to come here and olfer this testimony and give us the benefit of this 
information on the movement of people in Hidalgo County. 

I have interesting data taken from official reports and collected 
today. The Federal Government for the fiscal year 1967 spent in 
Cameron and Hidalgo Counties on eradication of animal disease $3,- 
564,000. That same year for migrant health services they spent in 
those two counties $419,000. We spent about $9 for eradication of 
animal disease for $1 on migrant health care. 

Now for fiscal 1968 it was unavailable. We could not find that figure. 
But for fiscal year 1969 we spent on eradication of animal disease, 
Cameron and Hidalgo Counties lumped together, we spent on eradica- 
tion of animal disease in those two counties $5,502,000, and on migrant 
health services in Cameron and Hidalgo Counties $564,677. 

So in the intervening 2 years the ratio of money spent on eradicating 
animal diseases went up over migrant he^ilth care to nearly 10 to 1, 
vis-a-vis, not quite 9 to 1 in 1967. What we do have. — we do have a 
breakdown as between Cameron and Hidalgo, wdiat monies were 
spent on migrant health services. It is not lumped together like eradi- 
cation of animal diseases. In fiscal 1967 Cameron — which has a smaller 
population than Hidalgo — Cameron in 1967 spent $156,000 on migrant 
health and Hidalgo County spent $263,000. 

Xow by 1969 Hidalgo County was si)ending less on migrant health 
than it was 2 wars earlier. It had gone down to $240,000 while Cameron 
was spending twice as much, from $156,000 in 1967 to $373,000 in fiscal 
1969. It was spending twice as much. 

Do you know why Cameron County was able to expand and double 
what It put in on migrant health care in those 2 years while Hidalgo 
County declined to $240,000 ? 

Dr. Love. After that long and complicated question, I am sorry to 
disappoint you with the answer of 'T don't know.'' 

Senator Yarborough. It would take someone in migrant health serv- 
ices themselves to answer that, somebody working in that division. 1 
thought those figures were interesting. 

Doctor, the i)hysician-to-patient ratio of Hidalgo County is 4,000 
to 1. What is the statewide ratio of physician to patient? 

Dr. Love. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000 to 1. 



9125 

Senator Yarborough. Are you sure it is that much ? Are you sure 
there are that many doctors? We in Texas do not have the doctor- 
patient ratio of many States. We are below the national average. 

Dr. Love. The thousand-to-one figure may be the national average. 
I do not know the ratio in Texas. 

Senator Yarborough. Thank you very much. As you say, this is a 
killing ratio. Do all your doctors come from U.S. medical schools? 

Dr. Lo^"E. No, sir. I am trying to run over in my mind which ones. 
We have at least three in the city of Mc Allen. There is one doctor in 
Mission who is a graduate of a medical school in Cuba, University of 
Havana. He is a Cuban refugee. 

Senator Yarborough. Quite a number of the leading doctors have 
been driven out of Cuba. 

Dr. Love. One of the prospects we have for Starr County is a Cuban 
refugee. 

Senator Yarborough. A few months ago I was at Eagle Pass where 
they dedicated a new hospital built with Hill-Burton funds, having 
only one hospital in the history of the place. At the dedication I learned 
that of the four doctors in Eagle Pass, a city of about 15,000 — of the 
four doctors there, three were young or middle-aged, were graduates 
of medical schools in Mexico. And, of course, they were very glad to get 
them. They were running out of doctors. The fourth one was an 
Anglo doctor who went to the border in 1916 in the National Guard, 
from New York and, after World War I, liked it and settled there. 
He was over 80 and still practicing. He was the only doctor educated 
in an American medical school still practicing in Eagle Pass, 

So great is the shortage of doctors in this country, which you gave 
us by this 4,000-to-l ratio. 

Doctor, you mentioned these two outpatient clinics that are being 
opened in hospitals. Have they actually been opened ? 

Dr. Love. Not as of now. But we are hopeful within the next, per- 
haps, 2 or 3 months they will. We have to get the organizational details 
settled. 

Senator Yarborough. You say the existing county health depart- 
ment is in sad need of reorganization. Is that one of your problems, 
the county health department? 

Dr. Love. That is a serious problem. We plan to take that thing 
apart and put it back together again. 

Senator Yarborough. Can you get the help of the incoming ad- 
ministration ? 

Dr. Lo\TE. Yes, we have a halfway promise from the present 
administration. 

Senator Yarborough. I have no further questions. Thank you for 
taking the time to come here, overburdened as you are there with 
that doctor-patient ratio. We are glad to have your testimony. 

Senator Mondale. Dr. Love, you listened to testimony this morning 
of this team of doctors who were in your area working for the Ford 
Foundation. You yourself have delivered a very moving and tragic 
story of health needs of the disadvantaged in your area. Would you 
have any reason to doubt the accuracy of those medical statistics? 

Dr. Love. No, I do not. 

Senator Mondale. Would you say as a leading practitioner this is 
a major problem which requires immediate and appropriate response? 

Dr. Love. I agree. 



5126 

Senator Moxdale. I gather, then, that your association is trying to 
gear up with the help of such Federal funds as you can obtain and 
try to deal -with these problems and move swiftly toward their cor- 
rection. Is that correct ? 

Dr. Love. Wc are going to have a good run at it. 

Senator Moxdale. Do you think you have enough doctors, parapro- 
fessionals and, just as importantly, do you think you have their sup- 
port and will have their help to do the job? 

Dr. Love. I will take the first part of that question. Everybody is 
short of doctors and nurses, et cetera. "We have a worse shortage than 
most places. We have taken what action we can, but this is one of 
those things that we cannot count on. "We are lucky if we get more 
doctors. 

Second, the second part of your question, do I have the support of 
the county medical society? Yes. I do. The resolution — these medical 
clinics are only part of a four-point resolution that was passed by 
unanimous vote of Hidalgo-Starr Counties Medical Society in April, 
I believe. 

Senator Mondale. You have their resolution in support of the work 
that you are doing, but do vou think you will have their support when 
the service is to be deliA-ered ? 

Dr. LiOVE. I think so, I made mention this seems to be snowballing. 
It really does, in terms of the participation. 

This is one of the reasons why these clinics have to be put in the 
hospitals. If you put them in a building two blocks away from the 
hospital, they will soon be forgotten bv the physicians practicing in 
this hospital. "We have taken the position that there is almost no 
way to solve the strictly medical problems of that county unless we 
involve — unless we do one of two things : involve the physicians that 
are there or move in an army of new physicians. 

Senator Mondale. But even with such Federal help as you might 
obtain, this task will involve an awful lot of either free professional 
care or reduced fees, will it not? In short, many of your colleagues 
will have their choice of earning more money in traditional practice 
or earning less helping the disadvantaged. 

Do you thmk many will find that alternative attractive? I am not 
being critical of doctors. I am a lawyer, and my profession faces the 
same dilemma. 

Dr. LovTv- 1 believe the feeling on the part of most of the part is that 
they will do it, no matter. They will go ahead and do it, no matter what 
it takes. 

The Chairman. Do you practice in McAllen ? 

Dr. Love. Yes, sir. 

Senator Yarborough. Thank you very much again. 

Senator Mondale. Dr. Love, we appreciate your presence here. "We 
are encouraged by your leadership. "We wish you well and we hope 



5127 

Federal support will be forthcoming; I think your efforts require 
that support. 

If I migh make one point. You said, "I beg you to reverse the plan 
and decrease" 

Dr. Love. For inpatient care. 

Senator Mondale. Are these funds that have been appropriated, 
the ones in question ? 

Dr. Love. As I understand it from the HEW people in Dallas, the 

Elans for the migrant health funds are to increase the outpatient care 
usiness and to gradually phase out the inpatient business. I have no 
argument with increasing funds available for outpatient care, but it 
is difficult to separate outpatient care from necessary inpatient care 
and we have to have some money to do this. 

Senator Yarborough. Dr. Love, that is a matter to be taken up ad- 
ministratively. That was an administrative decision, to change the 
thrust of where they spent the money, inpatient or outpatient. We did 
try to write out exactly where and how you were supposed to spend 
the money to get the best care they could out of the limited amount of 
money. 

It was far too little. I have gotten a bill passed to raise it within the 
2 years' time to $30 million. That would double, but still it is not 
enough. But we did not attempt to tell the executive officials just where 
to spend it, whether outpatient or inpatient. So that is an administra- 
tive matter. 

I agree with you if you spend less money on a certain program, you 
are not going to get as much care out of it. 

About these hospitals. There has been previous testimony that the 
valley is threatened with eminent closure because of their inability to 
stay open without treating medicare patients. Are you familiar with 
that ruling in your own work where you deal with the hospital ? Are 
you in any administrative capacity on any physicians board that keeps 
up with these rulings on medicare? 

Dr. Love. No, sir. 

Senator Yarborough. You are not familiar with what the basis of 
that ruling is. Whether claim it is statutory construction, or is it be- 
cause they claim there is no licensed practical nurse on duty 24 hours 
a day ? 

Dr. Love. The one active hospital in Starr County is Casino Ramirez' 
hospital. He is being forced to close his hospital because he was 
required to buy a $60,000 compressor. He was being forced to buy 
because of structural requirements a compressor costing $60,000. 

Senator Yarborough. And could not afford that? 

Dr. Lo\^. He could not afford it. 

Senator Yarborough. And that hospital will close? 



5128 

Dr. Love. It is going to; yes, sir. I might add that Starr County 
has passed a bond issue in order to build a county hospital. I don't 
know how far along they are with their Ilill-Burton application, but 
from my experience it is a minimum of 3 years before they will open 
the doors. 

Senator Yarborough. It will be a tragedy to close that hospital. It 
is better to have inadequate care than none at all. 

Dr. TvOM^:. That's right. 

Senator Yarborough. It is a tragedy to the people to close this. 

Dr. Lo\T.. That is correct. Dr. Ramirez ran a good hospital, I might 
say, for a fellow out there in the middle of nowhere, trying to practice 
good medicine. 

Senator Yarborough. I grew up in a rural town 25 miles from 
the county seat. The doctors performed operations in their offices, 
witli no hospitals in the county. 

Senator ^Ioxdale. Thank you. Dr. Love. We wish you well. 

Tomorrow morning we will have as witnesses Mr. JSIoore, executive 
director for the project on corporate responsibility, Washington, 
D.C.; Joseph Segor and Rudy Juarez of Florida; also Efrain Fer- 
nandez and Roger Dunwell, Rio Grande Valley, Tex.; and Clay 
Cochran, executive director. Rural Housing Alliance, Washington, 
D.C. 

We hope to ask of these people some tough questions about if what 
we hearcl this morning is still true, who is responsible at the local 
level and private as well as public sector? A^^lat kind of forces 
perpetuate this human tragedy, and what steps must be taken to 
move decisively to overcome these insults to mankind? 

I am pleased to announce that the president of the Coca Cola Co., 
James Paul Austin, wired me that he will be glad to testify before 
our committee. He says he shares our concern about the critical prob- 
lems of migrant labor and he welcomes this opportunity to describe 
the program of the Coca Cola Co. in dealing with this problem. 

We hope to liear from 'Sir. Austin later this week. I think it depends 
upon the hearing scheduled before the full committee, but I will talk 
to Senator Yarborough about that later. 

We will also be hearing from Mr. Carr, who directed the NBC 
documentary. 

I would like to insert in the record at this point material related 
to issues discussed at today's hearing. 

(The material referred to follows :) 



5129 



MIGRANT 



Colorado Council on Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Workers and Families 

665 GRANT 
DENVER. COLORADC 

July 30, 1970 



Area Code 303 665 GRANT 

892-6911 DENVER, COLORADO 80203 



Honorable Walter F. Mondale 
Subcoimnittee on Migratory Labor 
Old Senate Building 
Washington, D.C. 

Dear Sir: 

Enclosed please find a study which was conducted 
by the Colorado Migrant Council on the nurtitional status 
of migrant children. Perhaps this document will provide 
additional information which your committee might be able 
use in connection with your ongoing hearings. 

If we can be of further assistance, please do 
not hesitate to call on us. 

Sincerely, 






Ralph D. Martinez 
Deputy Director 



pw 
end 



5130 



NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF PRESCHOOL 
MEXICAN - AMERICAN MIGRANT FARM CHILDREN 



H. Peter Chase, M.D. 

Assistont Professor of Pediatrics 

University of Colorado Medical Center 
4200 E. Ninth Ave., Denver, Colo. 80220 

ViJay Kumar, M.D. 
Research Fellow in Pediatrics 

University of Colorado Medical Center 

Janice M. Dodds, M.Ed. 
Nutritionist, Instructor of Pediatrics 

University of Colorado Medical Center 

H. E. Sauberlich, Ph.D. 
Chief of Chemistry Division 

U.S. Army Medical Research & Nutrition Laboratory 

Fitzsimons General Hospital 

Robert M. Hunter, Ph.D. 
Associate Professor of Sociology 
University of Colorado 

Robert S. Burton, M.S. 

University of Colorado 

Vaughn Spalding, R.N. 
Director of Migrant Health Services 
Colorado Migrant Council 



This work was supported by Grant ' CG 8074 Emergency Food 
and Medical Services, Title II D, Economic Opportunity Act 



5131 



ABSTRACT 

The nutritional and medical problems of 300 Mexican-American 
preschool children of migrant workers were evaluated in the spring of 
1969 in Colorado. Outstanding in the history was the high infant 
mortality of 63 per 1000 live births. Frequent findings on physical 
examination included: low height attainment, upper respiratory in- 
fections, skin infections, dental caries, enlarged livers, hypertrophied 
tongue papillae, and conjunctival folliculitis. Biochemical testing 
showed low vitamin A levels in 159 children, low alkaline phosphatase 
in 120 children, and low total serum proteins in 28 children. Possible 
methods for improving the nutrition and health of the migrant children 
are discussed. 



5132 



Migrant farm labor is presently used In probably every state of the 
JJnited States. The .total number of migrant farm workers is difficult to 
estimate because of a lack of record keeping and the problem of definition 

as to who Is a migrant farm laborer. In Colorado, estimates have ranged from 

1 2 

25,000 to 100,000 workers depe'iding In part on whether intrastate workers 

crossing county lines and residents living at home and working at seasonal farm 

labor are included with the interstate workers. Since discontinuing the usage 

of alien form workers, in which male workers from outside of the United States 

were transported to the United States for farm labor, there has been an increase 

in family travel and the resulting problems. From the view of health care it should 

be noted that whereas the mean number of workers per family is 3.5, the mean 

number of traveling family members is 6.6. The extra family members are frequently 

children and infants who must travel with their parents and suffer the nutritional and 

health consequences of travel. Little information is presently available concerning 

the medical and nutritional problems of these people. An earlier study described 

3 
biochemical alterations in negro migrant workers In New York state . A recent 

nutritional survey In Texas probably also includes evaluation of some preschool 
children of Mexican-American farm workers. The purpose of the present study was to 
evaluate the nutritional-medical problems of the preschool children of the Mexican- 
American farm laborers. 

METHODS 

Three hundred Mexican-American children, age six years or below, were studied 
in May and June, 1969. Children were studied in two locations each in northeastern 
and southeastern Colorado. They came to the clinics voluntarily as a result of local 
publicity, were brought by volunteers, or were seen at one location in southeastern 
Colorado on the first day of a Head Start-Infant Education School program. The 
evaluation included medical histories, physical examinations, and blood biochemical 

determinations. Heights and weights were evaluated by means of the Boston Iowa 

. 5 . 

Growth Grids, and head circumference on on international grid. Interviews concerning 

food purchasing habits and cooking equipment available '° ^^^ farnily were conducted by a 



5133 



nutritionisf (J.M.D.). Weekly family shopping lists were compufed for approximately 
forty fanilies. All laboratory tests were done on venous blood samples drawn after over- 
night fasting, or in a few cases, four hours after a meal. Vitamins A and C, and serum 
and RBC folacins were determined at Fitzsimmons General Hospital, Denver, Colorado 
by methods used in the National Nutrition Survey. Other biochemical determinations 
were done in the Colorado General Hospital Pediatric Microchemistry Laboratory. 

Data was analyzed (under the direction of R.5.B.) by computerized statistical 
methods applied to four areas of the study: sociologic data, medical history, physical 
examination, and laboratory tests. Two broad types of analyses were undertaken: 
descriptive, for summarizing the characteristics of the sample, and inferential, 
for finding significant relationships among these characteristics. The descriptive analysis 
consisted primarily of frequency distributions, comparisons with "normal" values, and 
determination of means and standard deviations when applicable. The inferential analyses 
were directed toward relating the laboratory measurements to the other data. The method 
used was one-way analysis of variance, with items from the sociologic data, the medical 
history, and the physical examination as independent variables, and laboratory measurements 
as dependent variables. Analyses of variances determined whether different sub-samples of 
subjects differed significantly with regard to their average laboratory measurements. 

RESULTS 
Sociologic Data 

Sociologic data is available on 151 of the Mexican-American migrant families 
studied in May and June, 1969. One hundred and sixteen of the families gave their 
home base as Texas, 26 were intrastate migrants from Colorado, and the remaining 
families were from miscellaneous other states. All fathers were form laborers, working 
a mean of 6. 3 months per year in agruculture and 1 . 8 months per year in other occupations. 
Mean educational attainment for the fathers was sixth grade and for the mothers, fifth 
grade. The mean annuo! family income was $1,885, with 61% of the families having 
an income less than $2,500 per year and 84% with on annual income under $3,500. 
Twelve families (7.9%) received financial welfare assistance in some form during the 
previous year. In 57% of the families only Spanish was spoken; in 36% of the 
families, both Spanish and English were spoken by at least one of the parents; and in 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- n 



5134 



T^/o of the families only English was spoken. These sociologic findings do not differ 
from those gathered on a sample of 3500 Mexican-American migrant families by the 
Colorado Migrant Council between 1966 and 1969, This would suggest that our 
sample is representative of the Colorado Migrant agricultural population. 

Medical History 

The mean number of pregnancies per mother was 5.7, with 29 of the 142 
mothers having had more than ten pregnancies. Sixty-five of the 825 pregnancies 
resulted in miscarriages or still births, for a fetal wastage of 79/1000 pregnancies. 
Forty eight of the 760 liveborn children died within the first year of life, for an infant 
mortality of 63/1000 infants. Mean family size at the time of the study was 4.6 
children per family. 

The 300 children were equally divided between moles and females in all 
age groups; 45 children were under one year of age, 31 were between ages one and two, 
41 between two and three, 66 between three and four, 59 between four and five, and 58 were 
between the ages of five and six years. One third of the mothers received no prenatal 
core or nutritional supplements prior to delivery. Two hundred and thirty one of the 
300 children were born either in the hospital or on out-patient medical clinic. Mean 
birth weight was 3.2 kg. , with 27 children weighing less than 2500 gm at birth. One 
third of the mothers initiated breast feeding, and 25% were still breast feeding when the 
child was two months old. Supplementary vitamins were received by 10% of the children 
in the first six months of life. One half of the children had received no DPT or polio 
immunizations. Twenty-four mothers gave a history of recurrent diarrhea (more than 
one episode in the previous year) in their children. Ten percent of the children had 
never been examined by a physician while 86% of the children two years of age or 
older hod never been seen by a dentist. 

Food Purchasing Habits and Die tary Adequacy 

Thirty-five families reported spending 520-530 per week on food 
with five reporting higher expenditures up to 560. When the shopping lists 
were priced at the local markets the families were found to have consistently 
over-estimated the cost of their shopping lists by five to fifteen dollars. The 
basic weekly food supply for migrant families is reported in Table I, There 



5135 



was little variation between type and quantity of food purchased regardless of 
family size. However, there is no way to determine individual intake from this data. 
From these shopping lists, which were descriptive of the family food habits, it is 
estimated that protein intake is adequate (vegetable proteins from beans and some 
animal proteins from eggs and milk). Thiamine, riboflavin, and niacin intake 
should be adequate also (cereals, enriched flour, and its products). Calcium 
and vitamin D intake are minimal to low as seen by the low consumption of 
milk. Iron, too,is minimal to low as a result of the insufficient intake of iron-rich 
foods. Vitamin A intake is almost negligable, although vitamin C intake should be 
adequate. When milk was available in the homes, the infants under two years of 
age would receive first priority with the next oldest having next priority. All of 
the families reported purchasing at least one third of the foods listed in Column 2, 
Table I in addition to the standard food supply when adequate money was available. 
When the additional money was available for food, the mothers reported they purchased 
more meat, milk, fruit, (apples, bananas, oranges), and vegetables (tomatoes, lettuce) 
in that order. If less money was available, these foods would be cut out in the reverse 
order. Candy, flavored beverages, cookies, and sweet rolls were purchased in the same 
amounts regardless of the money available unless the income was drastically reduced, 
in which case the sweet foods were eliminated from the diet. 

The cooking equipment available in the homes was limited as the families carry 
very little with them during migration. Each baby in a family has one bottle. The 
family has two or three pots for cooking beans, one dish meals, or for frying; and 
a griddle for making tortillas on gas stoves. There is always a stove in the house 
with one half of these being wood stoves. Less than one-eighth of the families had 
running water. Pumps in the yards were the usual means of securing water. 

Physical Examination Data on the 300 Children 

Fifty-four of the 300 children were less than the third percentile for height, 17 
were less than the third percentile for weight, and 17 less than the third percentile for 
head circumference. Hair dyspigmentation was noted in 21 children. Skin findings 



5136 



were prominent v/ith nyperkeratosis in 19 and skip nfections 'n 32 children. 
Angular lip lesions were present in ten of the children. Eye findings were 
also prominent, with increased corneal vascularization in 23, dry wrinkled 
conjunctivoe in 56, and folliculitis suggestive of trachoma in 29 
children . ■ Mucoid or purulent nasal discharge was present in 69 of the 
300 children (23%). Hypertrophic tongue papillae were present in 69 (Figure 
]) and atrophic tongue papillae in 36 children. Large tonsils were noted in 
67 and large cen/ical lymph nodes in 36 children. Thirty-nine percent of all 
children and 58% of the children over four years of age had dental caries, with 
a mean of four caries per child. Upper limb muscle mass was decreased in 31 and 
lower limb muscle mass in 28 children. Epiphyseal wrist swelling was present 
in 28 children and prominent rib beading in 22 children . Livers were palpable more 
than two centimeters below the costal margin in the right mid nipple line in 
49 of the 300 children. Skin fold measurements are shown in Table II. 
Laboratory T ests 

Hemoglobin and hematocrit values are compared to normal values for the 
state of Colorado as all children had been in the state at least tv/o weeks. 
These normal values ore similar to those obtained in o nutritional survey of 
5000 preschool children in the United States.^ Forty-seven children had 
hemoglobins below the tenth percentile for age, and forty-one children had 
hematocrits below the tenth percentile for age (Figure 2). 

Levels of serum and RBC folacin, vitamin A, and vitamin C are shown in 
Table III. Twenty nine children were below normal in serum folacin levels, 
and three children were below in RBC folacin levels. One hundred and fifty- 
nine children (55%) were below normal in serum vitamin A levels. Two children 
were low in vitamin C levels. 

Laboratory results other than vitamin levels are shown in Table IV. 
Serum alkaline phosphatase levels were low in 120 children, blood urea nitrogens 
were low in 49 children, and amylase activity was reduced in 16 children. Total 
serum proteins were low in 28 children and serum albumin in 73 children. Serum 
carotene was low in 219 children. Cholesterol levels were low in 44 children and 
high in 28 children. 



5137 

STATISTICAL CORRELATIONS 

H istoricol- Biochemical Correlations 

Children whose parents spent part of the year employed in a trade outside of 
farm labor had higher mean total protein values (7.2 gm%) than children whose parents 
worked only in form labor throughout the year (6.6 gm%; p<.01). The language 
spoken by the parents also correlated with mean laboratory values. Children whose 
parents spoke only Spanish had lower total serum proteins and albumin (p<.01) levels 
than children of parents who spoke English(with or without Spanish in addition). Although 
not statistically significant, cholesterol and alkaline phosphatase levels also tended 
to be lov/er in children whose parents spoke only Spanish. There were no significant 
differences in laboratory tests done on children of the 26 families from the state of 
Colorado (intrastate migrants) compared to the children of interstate farm workers. 
Mean vitamin levels tended to be lower in children who had weighed under 
2500 gm at birth (Table V). The mean laboratory values were also significantly 
influenced by the total number of children in the families. Thus mean vitamin A and 
C levels were higher in families with fewer children, as were alkaline phosphatase 
and BUN values. Gamma globulins, likely an Indication of the numbers of infections, 
were higher in families with larger numbers of children. 

When vitamins were given to the mother during pregnancy or to the child in 
the first six months of life, the vitamin A and C levels were higher in the 
child (Table V). This was true for children under one year of age but was also true 
for the older children. Serum folacin levels were significantly higher (p< .01) 
in the children under one year of age whose mothers had received vitamins, but 
did not remain higher in older children. RBC folocins were also higher in 
children under one year of age whose mothers received vitamins or when vitamin 
supplements were given to the children, although the differences were not 
statistically significant. When vitamin C levels were analyzed on all of the 
children, the levels of the low birth weight children were inexplicably higher 
than those in the children of higher birth weight. Vitamin levels and other 
lab tests did not differ significantly between bottle fed and breast fed infants 
under one year of age. A history of greater Incidence of having had measles was 



5138 



found for children with low vitamin A levels (36 of 126) than in children with 
normal vitamin A levels (18 of 120). 

Physical Examination - Biochemical Correlations 

In the physical examination, low vitamin A levels correlated 
statistically (p< .05) with a greater incidence of : 1) skin infections, 
2) reduced upper and lower extremity muscle moss, 3) nasal discharge, 
and 4) hypertrophied or atrophied tongue papillae compared to children 
with normal vitamin A levels. There was no correlation between low 
vitamin A levels and corneal dryness, hypervascularity, dyspigiin_ntation, or 
wrinkling on the physical examination. Skin fold thicknesses tended to be 
lower for children with low vitamin A levels than for children with normal 
levels. The mean lateral thoracic, subscapular, and triceps skinfolds 
measured 5. 1 ,5. 5, and 7.8 respectively for children with low vitamin 
A levels, compared to 5. 7,6. 1 , and 8.3 respectively for children with normal 
vitamin A levels. 

Mean laboratory values were determined for the presence or 
absence of each of the physical examination findings. Table VI shows 
the mean laboratory values in children with or without various abnormalities 
on the physical examination. When a trend appeared, values ore included 
even though statistical analysis did not prove a difference. Vitamin A values 
were significantly lower (p<- .05) in children with hair dyspigmentation, skin 
infections, and abnormal tongue papillae. Serum folacins and gamma globulin 
levels were both significantly lower (p< .01) in children with large livers. 
Mean vitamin C and alkaline phosphatase values were significantly lower in 
children with low height. 

DISCUSSION 
The general lack of medical care prior to and following delivery is 
reflected in the high mortality rate in the first year of life. In this study, the 
Mexican-American migrant infant mortality was found to be 63 per 1000 live 
births. The 1968 infant mortality for low income areas served by the Neighbor- 
hood Health Centers and the City Hospital in Denver was 23.4 per 1000 live 



5139 



10 
births. This was greatly reduced trom the 1^^64 Denv^' ligure of 33. 1 per 

1000 live hirths token prior to the onset of t''e neighborhood health program 

in 1965. The migrant neonatal mortality figure of 63 deaths per 1000 live 

births is comparable to o similar figure for the overall United States in the 

year 1930. The high infant mortality may, in port, be due to the lack of 

of hospital delivery of newborn infants, most of whom would be considered 

"high risk" because of the lack of prenatal care, the poor housing and 

sanitation, inadequate nutrition, and the need to travel with a small infant. 

It is conceivable that rural neighborhood health programs, as recently 

proposed for migrant health care, could greatly reduce the neonatal 

mortality in this population. A program for hospital core will also be necessary, 

however. Migrant families do not qualify for Medicaid benefits in most 

states because they must first qualify for some program of categorical 

assistance. These commonly include Aid to Dependent Children and 

programs to assist the blind, disabled, and aged. Rarely do migrating 

Mexican-American families lack a father, and he is usually employed. 

Few,ifany, migrants are blind, disabled, or aged. Thus, while residency 

has been eliminated as a requirement for Medicaid, it has been of lirtle 

use to the migrant. 

The incidence of low serum vitamin A levels in these United States children was 

higher than that found in ten of eleven underdeveloped countries in the Far East, Central 

America, and South America studied over the past ten years. This high incidence of 

vitamin A deficiency was anticipated from the lack of foods containing vitamin A in the 

basic food list reported in Table I. Egg yolks are the main, and frequently the only, 

source of vitamin A. Some families pick carrots In Texas for approximately two 

weeks in March and bring these home for meals or for trade with other families. However, 

the use of mechanical harvesters of carrots and of Mexican National form workers on a 

doily basis have decreased the amount available for consumption by families or farm 

workers in Texas. It is also true that carrots are not a popular food in the diet of the 

Mexican-American culture, and nutrition-education programs may be one way of 

approaching the deficiencies. 

With one third of the mothers receiving no prenatal care or nutritional supplementotion 

and a much higher percentage receiving inadequate nutritional care, it is likely that vitamin 

A deficiency is present from birth in many of the infants. Mothers of tieficient infants 

had a greater number of pregnancies than mothers of children with normal vitamin A 



5140 



levels. It is likely that the greater number of pregnancies,with greater maternal defjietion 
of vitamin levels, as well as the larger number of sibi ings to divide the food amongst. were 
both important factors in the lower vitamin levels of these children. Low vitamin A 
values were more apt to be found in infants whose mothers did not receive nutritional 
supplements during pregnancy. Improved prenatal care would help the nutritional status 
of the offspring and would probably reduce the infant mortality. 

The low vitamin A levels correlated statistically with an increased incidence of 
skin infections and upper respiratory tract infections on physical examination. Changes 
in the tongue papillae appeared to be a reliable physical sign of low serum vitamin 
A levels in this group (Figure 1) whereas dryness and wrinkling of the cornea and 
increased corneal vascularization did not show any statistical correlation . Dark adaption 
was not evaluated, but is known to be associated with vitamin A deficiency. Xerophthalmia 
was not detected in any of these children. An increased incidence of measles was found 
in the medical history amongst children with low vitamin A levels suggesting that improvement 
of nutritional status may reduce the incidence of measles, in undernourished populations, 
measles is known to be associated with a high mortality rate. The elevated gamma 
globulin levels in children with low vitamin A levels likely reflect the increased number 
of infections. Improvement of nutritional status would likely improve both the morbidity 
for infections and the mortality rate in these children. The time necessary to improve 
serum vitamin A levels is apparently quite long. We restudied nineteen children 
with low vitamin A levels after a minimum of 28 days in Infant Education - Head 
Start over a six week period. They received two meals and two snacks per day in the 
school and oral vitamin drops from the school nurse. In spite of this supplementation, 
serum levels were still low upon re-evaluation. It is known that liver stores must be 
replenished first in vitamin A deficiency, and it is likely that this is what was happening 
in these children. It was not appropriate to obtain liver biopsies to more accurately assess 
the degree of vitamin A deficiency. 

The majority of the families had come recently from Texas where fresh grapefruit 
and oranges had been readily available. It was therefore not surprising that vitamin 
C levels were quite normal. Potatoes ore also a staple of the diet and, when eaten in 
large quantities, can meet vitamin C requirements. It was of interest, however, that 
vitamin C values tended to be lower in children with low vitamin A levels, and that 
vitamin C levels were significatly lower in the 59 children with low height. It is possible 
that the physical examination findings of the rib beading and epiphyseal swelling were 
related to vitamin D deficiency at another time in the year. Very few high alkaline 



5141 



phosphatase values were found, suggesting that active rickets was not the cause 
of these findings. It was striking that the children with physical signs of vitamin 
D deficiency were the same children who gave o history of not liking milk. This 
was a similar finding in other children showing clinical signs of poor nutritional 
status, in that they frequently disliked one of the staples in the families' diets. 
Because of economic limitations, the families were not able to moke alterations in 
the food regularly purchased to meet idiosyncracies of one child's likes or 
dislikes. A greater number of children had lower serum folacins than RBC folocin 
levels. It is thought that the former represents recent intake, whereas the latter 
represents long term accumulation. This would suggest poorer nutritional intake 
while in the migrant stream than when at home. However, the serum and RBC 
folacins correlated significantly (p< .01) in all age groups. This is suggestive that 
current normal values for one of these tests may be inaccurate. 

In the present study, children tended to hove adequate subcutaneous fat, 
but to have a frequent incidence of low height attainment. When Mexican children 

come from upper economic class families in Mexico City, height attainment is similar 

12 
to the Iowa Growth Grids used in this study. It appears likely that the low height 

attainment in our children was the result of generalized undernutrition, including 

protein and vitamins^ rather than being on a genetic basis. The decreased stature 

may also be related to poor prenatal nutrition. Using a recent classification of 

13 
kwashiorkor , one of our children had serum proteins below 5.5 gm% and was below 

the third percentile for height, and would be classified as having kwashiorkor. At least 
two additional children would have been classified as having generalized caloric 
deficiency or marasmus. 

Cholesterol levels were above normal in 28 of the 300 children (9.3%). This 
may be related to the common use of animal fats in cooking. As it is the current 
belief that cholesterol deposits start in chi Idhood, it is possible that this malnutrition 
is as dangerous as some of the deficiencies. Information concerning the mean age and 
the incidence of coronary artery disease would be of interest in the adult Mexican- 
American population. 



5142 



Folliculitis suggestive of trachoma wa5 an unexpected finding in ten percent 
of these children. The presence of trachoma was verified by G'ensa and fluorescent 
antibody staining, and is being described in detail in a separate report. Trachoma 
is usually not a serious disease in children, although some children did show evidence 
of secondary infections. Trachoma is a major couse of blindness in underdeveloped 
countries, and one father was coincidentally seen who was apparently losing his 
vision from complications of trachoma. Four of his five children were also infected. 

There did not appear to be a single laboratory test that best reflected nutritional 
status in these children. Low alkaline phosphatase values were found in 120 of the 
300 children, and correlated statistically with low height attainment. Because of 
the lack of normal values for laboratory tests in children of different ages and cultures, 
it was important to compare mean laboratory values for children with and without 
abnormal physical exominotion findings (Table VI). Determining the mean and range 
of values for children without abnormal physical findings might be a better way to determine 
the normal values for a group than is the present method of doing two standard 
deviations for the mean value of a population studied. Unfortunately, multiple 
laboratory findings hod a tendency to be lower (Table VI) In the presence of abnormal 
physical exam findings, and it is often difficult to associate an abnormal finding 
with any specific laboratory test. 

The children's mean serum protein levels were significantly higher when the 
fathers had additional employment outside of summer farm labor. The children's 
mean serum proteins were also significantly lower when the parents did not speak 
English. The ability to speak and read the English language allows the migrant people 
to communicate with employers, to read labels on commodity foods, to communicate 
with health and social personnel who might be able to help them to learn about 
community benefits available, and to help their children with the language that 
must be spoken in the schools. As 57% of the parents do not speak English, adult 
education classes for teaching English would be a way in which these families might 
be helped. 

The mean income of the migront families In this study was S1885. 00 per year, 
with 60% earning less than S2500.00 per year. Yet only twelve families reported 
having received welfare assistance In the previous year. Money is not available for 



5143 



adequate health core or nutrition. Travel is necessary for migrant farm workers in 
order to find work, and is an additional expense to the family. Travel perpetuates 
low educational attainment, as children are removed from schools and return late. 
It is not unusual for home base schools to penalize the children for their absence 
by reduction in grades, regardless of the ability of the children. A positive aspect of 
present migrant programs is the attempt being mode to furnish summer schools in 
the areas of travel for the migrant children. 

Winter employment in Texas is often difficult to find. Agriculture is the major 
industry in southern Texas, where many of the Colorado migrants come from, and inexpensive 
farm labor can still be hired on a daily basis from Mexico. The Mexican Notional who 
enters the United States illegally for long term work is also still a problem in Colorado, 
They keep the pay low and take jobs from the United States residents. The illegal 
entrants are unable to complain to authorities when someone decides not to pay 
them, or when they are given substandard housing as they know they would then 
be caught and returned to Mexico. At present there is no penalty for farmers 
hiring illegitimate labor and this might be considered. 

At present many existing programs ore unable to be utilized by the migrant 
population. Inclusion of the migrant population in the medicore-medicoid hospitali- 
zation programs without first meeting each county's welfare certification practices would 
be of great benefit. Migrants do not presently qualify for food stamps while traveling 
because of unequal earnings throughout the year. Recommendations mode at the White 
House Conference on Nutrition for food stamp certification once yearly and applicable 
from state to state would be helpful but this has not yet been acted upon. Commodity 
foods have been of little help because of limited items and pride, with a frequent 
history given for having been told "you ore strong and able to work, so don't come 
back here again. " An additional problem concerning commodity foods is the storage 
of approximately thirty pounds of food per person (frequently distributed on a 
monthly basis) in a one or two room dwelling. Lock of room, refrigeration, and 
protection from rodents and insects would probably interfere with utilization of 
commodity foods if they were readily available. 



5144 



A possible solution to the problem of communication between migrants and 
existing health and welfare facilities is the introduction of migrant health aids 
into the migrant stream as is currently being tried on an experimental basis by the 
Colorado Migrant Council. With the alteration of existing program policies to 
accommodate migrants, and the use of health aids to make the programs known to 
the people, the health and nutritional status of the migrants could greatly improve. 
Long term objectives of finding suitable jobs and living conditions outside of the 
migrant stream will be necessary. Adequate nutrition^health care, education, and 
housing should receive high priority in the present needs of the migrant farm worker 
and his family. 



5145 



TABLE I 
PRIMARY FOODS IN THE COLORADO MIGRANT FARM WORKERS' DIET 



BASIC FOOD ITEMS 
Potatoes 

Eggs 

Wheat Flour 

Hamburger 

Chicken 

Dry cereal 

Pinto beans 

Rice 

Macaroni 

Lettuce 

Tomatoes 

Lord 

Kool-Aid 



ADDITIONAL FOODS 

Chuck roast 

Ribs 

Cabbage 

Carrots 

Canned corn 

Bananas - in season 

Apples - in season 

Oranges - in season 

Milk 

Bottled soft drinks 

Canned Chili (no meat) 

Canned spaghetti 

Sweet bread (rolls) 

Corn flour 



LESSER USED 
ADDITIONAL FOODS 

Pork roast 
Pork chops 
Variety meats 
Cookies 
Oatmeal 
Saltine Crackers 
Bread 
Ice cream 
Sugar 

Candy (Hard) 
Potato chips 
Corn Chips 
Apple juice 
Pineapple juice 
Orange juice 



5146 

TABLE II 

SUBCUTANEOUS SKIN FOLD MEASUREMENTS" 



<7.5 



■ 5 mm 



Lateral thoracic 


238 


139 


11 


Subscapular 


235 


99 


2 


Triceps 


126 


15 






* Values represent the number of children falling into each 
group OS measured with standard techniques using the 
Lange Skin Fold Calipers. 



5147 





TABLE III 








VITAMIN LEVELS * 








Less Than Acceptable 




Acceptable 




Deficient Low 






Serum folacin 
(ng/ml) 


4(<3) 25(3.0-5.9) 




264 (> 6.0) 


RBC folacin 
( ng/ml) 


2(<-140) 1(140-159) 




285 (> 160) 


Vitamin A 
(Mg/lOOmI) 


9(<10) 150+(10.0-29, 


.9) 


129 (^30 or 
>20 if < 6 mos old) 



Vitamin C 0(<0.1) 2(0.1-0.19) 280 (> 0.2) 

(mg/lOOmI) 

* Values represent the number of children in each category with the laboratory 
values shown in parentheses being of the National Nutrition Survey. 

+ Age corrections ore included, so that children under 6 months of age are 
not included unless the value was less than 20 fjg/lOO ml. 



5148 



TABLE IV 

LABORATORY RESULTS FROM THE PRESCHOOL 

CHILDREN OF MIGRANT WORKERS 



Alkaline Phosphatase 
(InternoHonol Units) 

Blood Urea Nitrogen 
(mg/lOOml) 

Cholesterol 

(mg/lOOmI) 

Amylase 

(Close-Street 

Units/100 ml) 

Total Serum Proteins 
(gm/lOOmI) 



Serum Albumin 
(gm 00ml) 

Serum Globulins 
(gm/100 ml) 



Serum Carotene 
(|jg/100ml) 



LOW 



120 (.50) 

49 (.^10 from 2-6 yrs) 
(<: 5 from 0-2 yrs) 

44(<'140 if>l yr) 
(^70 if<-l yr) 



I6(<:6) 



NORMAL 



)7i(50-150) 



HIGH 



4(-> 1 50) 



240 ( 1 0-20 from 2-6 yrs) 2( >20) 
(5-15 from 0-2 yrs) 

216(140-240 from 1-6 yrs) 28(>240 if 1-6 yrs) 

(70-170 if^-1 yr) (>170 if >1 yr) 



264 (6-33) 



73(<3.5 if <1 yr) 
(<3.8 if. 1 yr) 

a^ 26 (.0.15) 
a^ I (-0.34) 
P 1 7(< 0. 44) 
6(^0.44) 

219(.I00) 



208(3.5-5.5 if^lyr) 
(3.8-5.5 if->lyr) 

245(0.15-0.44) 
266(0.35-0.94) 
260(0.45-0.94) 
216(0.45-1.2 ) 

46 (100-150) 



1(>33) 



28(<5.0 if-- 6 mos) 251(5.0-8 if.^6 mos) 5(>8) 

(< 5. 5 from 6 mo-1 yr) (5. 5-8 if 6 mo-1 yr) 

(..6.0 if^l yr) (6-8 if 1 yr) 



1(>5.5) 

10(>0.45) 
4(>0.94) 
4(>0.94) 
60(>1.2) 

9(> 1 50) 



Values represent the number of children below, within , or above two 
standard deviations of normal. Normal values or their limits are 
included in parentheses. 



5149 



<N CN 










O — 


r^ r^ 






CM r^ 




-o o~ 


Of 


o — 


O CO 


co" O 


CO CO 


<r> n 





O r 



< 


Q. 


o 

c 


u 


3 
lO 


o 

c 


Q 




O) 


LU 


D 


a> 


2 


§ 


ol 


X 


*^ 


O) 


1— 


*Z 


c 



0> 


— 4) 


T) 


.. y -D 


~ 


u 


(U • — 






2: _c 


U 


C 


12 U 




'e 






o 


_c " 


< 




U < 



Z Q 



o ~ 

CD C 
«) C» 





c ^ 


















O "' 


-o 


u c 




;2 


-D 


-D 




o 


E o 

u E 


2 


o 


O 


O 


S| 






o 








>- c 


&<= 




=- c 


C 




^ C 


> ._ 

•5,-1 
o "5 




o 




•— 0) 




^ 0) 




— 0) 


^2 

0) ■- 

2 u 


< 


e IE 




^2 


o 

o 

o 


S IE 
12 u 


c 

o 



o 


2 u 


IS z: 


■ - "O 


'e 


2 u 


'e 


Ic ^ 


E 


Ic ^ 


U- 


Ic — 


jr > 


u < 


■^ ^ 


■^ 


in ~ 


■^ 


U < 


m 


U < 


U 

m 


U < 


o^ 




-5 u 


> 


u < 


> 




UO 




Qi 




<u -t 




Z 


















)=; >^ 



IT) . ^ 





CO r\ 


CM CM 


K o 


O- O 




CN CO 


-— 



c — 
-D U 



2 u 



P 00 00 o 



CN CS 00 00 



~ c 




— c 


> 




s-~ 


V 2; 


V t 


1j 




o -Q 


;- 2 


c "a 






_c ° 


Q> '- 




o 


< 


u °- o 


■^ -C 










_ Q) 






12 u 


E 


c 

'i 

o 


Vitamir 
Alkalin 
Gamma 
BUN 


U < 


E 
< 


U < 


z 


> 






./I 0) >. 










•SZi" 






«/> = o 






(L* ^ 






^^1^" 






.- 05 






■^ i; E 


uo 


o 


<" o P 


o 




1— 

+ 


^ 


i 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A 



5150 



— — . >o 

• o- en • 
On CO 



>0 — 1/1 
lO ^ CO 



CO -^ CN O CO o — 



— CO o 
. o 00 • 

O O _■ CN 



O ■* CO CO CM — 

• ■* • 00 — -o ■ 

hs On O . . . -^ 

CO CO (N O ■»)■ O — 



to -O 

00 . o 

■ CO 

o in uo 



< ^ ■<»■■* tT 



Zr 



E E >, 

O D C 



CO o 

o o 



c 
E 


o 

E 






_ o 
o o 






o 


E 


o 


Jc 


E "- 


'e 


'S~ 




o 

o 


>N 


o> 


2 U 


o 


o 


> 




0) 


OJ CO 












X 


U~l C£. 


> 


< 



■«t rs y3 m h^ 



0.-.-'" = !' 
o ^ .E E i -g -2 

X a: > > < ax< 



1^ CN 

o" uS 



> < 



•— 


o 


Q^ 


4_ 


= 


E 




o 


c 






0) 

1- 


o 


o 


<U 




c 

O 


D 
O 
> 


E 
o 


'e 

o 

X 




>N 

o 


c 




3 


o 


0) 


"5 


O 


o 
o 


^ 


>^ 


i 




^ 


-C 

a. 


o 


c 
o 
<u 

E 


c 






o 


a> 


i 




IJ 


c 


c 






D 


01 


.^_ 


c 


C 
HI 


T) 


c 
a; 


O) 


> 


_C 


a 


c 


'o) 




a. 


01 


»fl 


*- 


V 





■O O "O Q lO 
— On co' oo' O 



. _ c^j rv 
£2 ° r-: ;2 :§ 



• o 1^ o^ 00 o rv On 

c-j . . 

— oo(»orvf>ON->r 

— ■* CM " " 



uo -o 



CO l-v NO 

in o -"T 



— 00 -o 

On O nO 



■V hN c> o- o 

O O CM CO CO 



rv. CO CO On cnj 
— ' o CO -"t m' 



^ CO 00 o< 



in -tf 
00 o- 00 O 

o" p:; CO o" — ' 



01 ^^ .1: 



0) — ■- u- 



V 


-C 




Si 






■*" 


"i 








-D 


01 


01 


« 








c 


D 


o 


0> 


.p 


_o 


0) 


**- 


^ 


'e 




c 



0) o "t o 



^ u- 0* 01 — lO ^ 

^ o J 5. 0) o ° 



-c 0. -S -V 



_o iT 

E 
E E 



-0 .E .E 
^ E E 

S > > 



C -J; 

'— 0> 



E ^ U H "■ 

? = o c g o 

o J^ > 5: i-~< 



^ 'o < u o 



>>o 



-c ~ c 



5151 



REFERENCES 



1 Colorado Department of Health: Annual Progress Report - State Migrant Health 
Program, MG09F (69) June 1968-June 1969 - Publication * SH-DH(M) - 53 
(6-69-2). 

2. Survey provided by Colorado Migrant Council in 1969, estimated from one 
day census taken in the summer of 1969. 

3. Thiele, V.F., Brin, M., Dibble, M.V.: Preliminary biochemical findings 

in negro migrant workers at King Ferry, New York, Amer. J. of Clin. 
Nutr. 21: 1229, 1968. 

4. McGanity, William J.: Nutrition survey in Texas, Texas Medicine 65: 40, 1969. 

5. Nellhaus, G.: Head circumference from birth to 18 years: practicol composite 

of international and interracial graphs. Pediatrics 41: 106, 1968. 

6. O'Neal, R.M., Johnson, O.C. , and Schaefer, A.E. : Guidelines for classification 

and interpretation of group blood and urine data collected as part of the National 
Nutrition Survey, Pediat. Res. 4: 103, 1970. 

7. O'Brien, D. , Ibbott, F.A., and Rodgerson, D.O.: Laboratory Manual of Pediatric 

Micro-Biochemical Techniques, New York, 1968, Harper & Row Publishers. 

8. McCammon, R.W.: Human Growth and Devel opment, Illinois, 1970, Charles 

C. Thomas Publ isher. 

9. Owen, G.M., Nelsen, C.E., and Garry, P. J.: Nutritional Status of preschool 

children: hemoglobin, hematocrit, and plasma iron values, J. Pediat. 76: 761, 
1970. 

10. Chabot, Andre: Decreased infant mortality rats in a low income population, 
American Pediatric Society Abstracts, Second Plenary Session, 5^ 1970. 

11. H<=arings before the select committee on nutrition and human needs. Part 3, 
Washington, D,C., 1969, United States Government Printing Office, 751. 

12. Cravioto, J.: Personal Communication. Hospital Infantile de Mexico, Mexico 
City. 

13. Van Duzen, J . , Carter, J.P. , Second!, J. , and Federspiel, C: Protein and 
calorie malnutrition among preschool Navajo Indian children, Amer. J. Clin. 
Nutrition 22: 1362, 1969. 



5152 



14. Tanner, J.M. and R.H. Whitehouse: Standards for subcutaneous fat in 
British children, British Medical Journal 1^ 446, 1962. 

15. Lange Skin Fold Caliper, Manufactured by Cambridge Scientific ind. 
Cambridge, Maryland. 



Appreciation is expressed to Mrs. Carol Dabiere, Mrs. Josle Fetters, and Miss 
Noreen Welch for their assistance in obtaining laboratory values, to Mrs. Yaye 
Herman, Mr. Wayne Goad, and Dr. Nicholas Raica of Fitzsimons Nutrition 
Laboratories for analyses of Folic Acid, Vitamin C levels, and Vitamin A levels 
respectively. 



5153 



Correlations Between Biochemical Tests 

Laboratory values were correlated with each other by age groups; group I, 1-11 
months; group II, 12-23 months; group III, 24-35 months; group IV, 36-47 months, and 
group V, 48 months and above (only values of stotisticol significance of p^' . 05 ore 
reported). Hemoglobin correlated with hematocrits in all age groups (p<'.01) and 
with cholesterol levels in groups 1,111, and V. Carotenes were lower in children with 
lower hemoglobins in groups III and V. Serum folacins correlated significantly (p< .01) 
with RBC folacins in all age groups. Vitamin A levels correlated significantly (p<.02 
or less) with Vitamin C levels in four of the five age groups; 1,11,111, and V. Gamma 
globulin levels correlated negatively with the vitamin A levels (i.e. , higher levels of 
gamma globulin in the presence of lower vitamin A levels). Low phenylalanine levels 
correlated positively with low tyrosine and low BUN levels in group I, low BUN levels 
in group III, and '.-iw tyrosine levels in group V. Total serum proteins correlated with 
all of the protein components except a. proteins for all of the age groups. Total 
proteins correlated with serum cholesterol levels in groups 1,11, and IV. Children 
with low serum proteins had a mean phenylalanine-tyrosine ratio of .83, and 
children with normal serum proteins were found to have a ratio of 1.24 ( p;.01). 
Amylase and cholesterol values correlated with each other in groups I and IV. 



5154 i 

Deficiencie:s of Present Food Stamp Plan for Migrants, Prepared for Iowa 
State Department of Social Services, Maurice Harmon, Commissioner, 
April 24, 1969 

wages and income 

In 1967 the average annual wage for migratory workers who did farm and 
nonfarm work was $2149, and the average number of days worked was 168. 
When working, the average daily wage was $12.80. (Table I) From our own 
census of migrants in Iowa and southern Minnesota, these appear to be accurate 
figures. Average annual income was approximately $2000 to $2500 for a family 
of .six. 

This data points out two basic problems encountered by migrant workers. 
First, they are unemployed during several months of the year while traveling 
to new field locations or .searching for work, particularly during the winter 
months. Welfare a.*<sistance is not available when unemployed because of State 
residency requirements. Secondly, even when employed in the fields during the 
summer, wages are low and income extremely variable. Rain may prevent work 
for a week at a time. Full-time employment may not be available. Additionally, 
there are a number of expenses incurred by migrants when they come to the 
area including the cost of transiX)rtation. advances for the first few weeks, and 
the like. Thus, even when work is available, the individual or family is normally 
in debt and has difficulty maintaining a budget. 

food expenditures and nutritional requirements 

Given the low average family income and the variable nature of income 
throughout the year, migrant families are in clear need of food assistance if 
their children are to maintain an adequate diet. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has computed the nutritional needs of 
families ba.sed on the age and sex of family members, and the expenditures 
required to fulfill the.se needs. Table II presents co.st estimates for a "basic low- 
cost diet." with the figures adjusted by the Consumer Price Index. Based upon 
this table it would take approximately $1 59.04 per month to feed a family of 
six when the age and sex of family members are as shown in the table. The 
average daily cost per per.son amounts to $.95. If the children are somewhat 
younger, the monthly cost is reduced appropriately, and if the family size falls 
below six, then ten percent is added to the figures. 

In 1963 the I'SDA also prepared an economy food plan" which, using the 
same family, would bring the monthly food cost down to $129.00 or an average 
daily cost of $.72 per person. 

FOOD stamps and NUTRITIONAL NEBn)S 

Based upon the average daily wages reported in Table I, the average monthly 
income for a migrant family of six would be approximately .$.S84.00. Under the 
food stamp program for Iowa, the family would make a monthly payment of 
$104.00 and receive a $32.00 bonus for a total of ,$136.00. This total is le.ss than 
that required for the basic low-cost food plan computed by the I'SDA. An addi- 
tional expenditure of ,$23.00 would be necessary to reach this level. 

The total expenditure for stamps plus the bonus does surpa.ss the total recom- 
mended in the "economy food plan" by $7.00. Yet the I'SDA i>oints out that the 
use of these food plans requires a high degree of skill in food preparation as well 
as a keen economic sense. The problem is compounded for migrant families since 
(1) most of the income is received during the summer and is extremely variable 
from week to week making budgeting difficult and (2) migrants are ex- 
empted from welfare programs when unemployed because of local residency 
requirements. 

FOOD EXPENDITURES AS A PERCENTAGE OF INCOME 

A further problem of the food stamp program is the large i>ercentage of a 
familv's income which must l)e diverted to food expenditures because of the low 
lK)nus payments and the high payments required before receiving a bonu.s. Again, 
if the family earns $.384.00 i)er month, $104.00 mu.st be si>ent on food to receive 
the .$32.00 bonus. This amounts to an outlay of 27% of family monthly income, 
and thus still does not reach the level of the "basic low-cost plan." With an 
additional outlay of .$23.00, approximately 33% or one-third of family monthly 
income is diverted for food expenditures. 



5155 

Even more important, as monthly income declines, a proiwrtionately greater 
expenditure is required for food. If the monthly income for a family of six 
is $160.00, the family will spend $68.00 for a food stamp bonus of $40.00. This 
requires an outlay of 38% of monthly family income. If an additional $21.00 
is spent to bring food expenditures up to the standards of the "basic low-cost 
.plan" an outlay of nearly 75% is required. Even to bring the diet up to the 
standards of the "economy plan," an outlay of nearly 56% is necessary. This 
stands in comparison with the average expenditure for food of 22% in 1968 for all 
consumers. 

GOALS OF THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM 

All of these figures point out the fact that the food stamp program is not a 
welfare program. The purpose of the program in Iowa is "to increase the food 
purchasing power of low-income families and to increase the quantity and quality 
of foods consumed by these households thus providing for more adequate and 
nutritious diets to those who have heretofore had limited means for food pur- 
chases." For migrant families in particular it is clear that (1) purchase pay- 
ments for stamps are too high and (2) stamp bonuses are too small. Many 
families cannot achieve an adequate diet even when they can afford to purchase 
food stamps. 

EMKRGENCY SITUATIONS 

In using MEDI funds for the purchase of emergency food, a number of limita- 
tions in the food stamp program have been observed : 

(1) Many families lack sufficient funds for even the minimal payments for 
food stamps. This is particularly true when families first come into the area 
and lack income. Often, work does not begin for several weeks and the first pay 
check is not received until after two weeks of work. 

(2) When families first come, they may be receiving income but have incurred 
bills for transportation from Texas, advances for their families, and personal 
advances to pay for rent and the like during the first few weeks of work. Together, 
these costs normally total about $55.00, and the money is deducted directly from 
the migrant's pay check. These deductions are not counted in calculating income 
for the purchase of food stamps. 

(3) For large families, as already noted, food stamps are not sufficient to 
help the family maintain an adequate diet. Thus, for a family of twelve with 
no income, a $3.00 purchase will give $103.00 in .stamp.si. This must last the 
family for one month or a daily expenditure of $.29 per person. 

(4) When migrant families settle out of the migrant stream, a number of 
additional expenses are incurred in the first weeks of settlement including 
deposits for rent and utilities in particular. Rarely are there savings to cover 
these costs and such expenditures are not taken into account in the issuance 
of food stamps. 

(5) With the use of MEDI funds, the Migrant Action Program has sought 
to help migrant families purchase food stamps or commodities when such emer- 
gencies arise. To date, however, the funds used for these emergencies have 
been counted as income during the next purchase of food stamps. More aid 
could be provided if such emergency grants would be treated in the same man- 
ner as stipends from job-training programs. 

(6) Because of lack of income and/or low-cost housing, many families who 
would ordinarily qualify for the food stamp program are forced to live with 
relatives or friends whose income may be marginal or above poverty guide- 
lines, but who do not contribute to these families incomes. Since food stamp 
regulations require that the family maintain separate cooking facilities, the 
migrant families do not therefore qualify for the program. 

(7) Since field labor requires that migrants work up to 10-11 hours per 
day during the peak season, they are often not able to even make application 
for food stamps during the hours or the days that the county offices are open. 
Most emergency situations occur nights, or weekends.* 

(8) Many migrants arrive in this area via company busing, public transporta- 
tion, etc., and do not therefore haA-e transportation from camp to the Social 
Welfare county offices for purposes of applying for purposes of applying for 
food stamps.* 

(9) Language barriers cause much confusion in the application and qualify- 
ing process. In most cases Migrant Action Program is forced to send a staff per- 



5156 

son with the npplioaiit in order that ho may serve as interpretor to the Dept. of 
Social Welfare* 

CONCLUSION 

While Migrant Action Program does not have resource for in depth research, 
it is possible to point to indications in consideration of an annualized income 
plan for migrant workers vs. the actual income plan now being used in qualify- 
ing migrants for the food stamp program. 

Using $2,000 as the average income for workers who do both farm and non- 
farm work in Iowa with a family size of 6 members, the following would be 
true : 

I'nder the annualized income plan a worker would be certified on the basis 
of $165 average monthly income. The plan would require a monthly expenditure 
of $6S resulting in a $40 bonus which would provide a total monthly budget 
for food of $108. ($1S per month per person or $.G0 per day per person. Not 
enough to provide a ba.sic low-cost diet.) 

If however the income were earned over a ("-month period of full-time em- 
ployment (a rarity if not an impossibility), the family would be able to purchase 
food stamps for a 30 day period for a cash outlay of $104 dollars resulting in 
a $32 dollar bonus making available a total monthly budget for food of $136. 
($22.66 per person per month or $.75 per per.son i)er day. Still not enough to 
provide a basic low-cost budget diet.) 

It should lie noted however that by using the actual income plan, the migrant 
family during those months and periods of time when no income was being 
earned would be able to qualify for food stamps at minimum rates of $1.00 etc. It 
is equally obvious that it is es.sential that migrants have access to the food stamp 
program at all times. While still inadequate, actual income would be preferable 
to annualized income. 

TABLE I.— EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS: NUMBER OF FARM WAGEWORKERS. AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS WORKED, 
AVERAGE ANNUAL AND DAILY EARNINGS, MIGRATORY STATUS, AND TYPE OF WORK, 1967 

Average days Average 

Total »/orked annual Average 

workers in year wage' daily wage 

Total migratory workers 276,000 85 $922 $10.85 

Migratory workers who did farm but no nonfarm work... 170,000 138 1,494 10.80 

Migratory workers wtio did farm and nonfarm work 106,000 168 2,149 12.80 

1 These annual and daily earnings figures do not include the value of perquisites or fringe benefits furnished without 
charge by the employer. Actually, hired farmworkers generally receive less in the way of fringe benefits than do nonagri- 
cultural workers. A substantial proportion of farm wageworkers do receive some perquisites such as room and board, hous- 
ing, meals, transportation, and the use of garden space. The value of these items, however, generally does not equal the 
value of health and medical insurance, paid vacations, and other fringe benefits received by industrial workers. Housing 
and sanitary facilities are frequently substandard and are a less substantial income supplement than is commonly supposed. 

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, September 1968. 

TABLE 2.— REQUIRED EXPENDITURES FOR LOW-COST FOOD PLAN ON MONTHLY BASIS, FOR A FAMILY 

OF 6, AUGUST 1968.' 

Monthly 
Sex Age group expenditure 2 

Man 20-34 

Woman 20-34 

Girl 13-15 

Boy 13-15 

Child 10-12 

Child 7-9 

Total.. 

Average daily cost per person 

' All figures were adjusted by the consumer Price Index. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

2 The average family size for migrant families in the area in 1968 was 6. 10 percent was deducted from the monthly food 
costs since the family size is 6. It should also be noted that monthly food costs declined somewhat as the age of children 
decreases. 

Source: Consumer and Food Economics Research Division, ARS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, January 1963. 



$30. 36 


23.08 


27.36 


29.92 


26.08 


22.24 


159. 04 


.95 



♦To .illpvlatp thpso problems. MAV wonlfl bo willing to act as a proxy to enable 
preater partirlpation of migrants in the food stamp plan. This wonld he similar to the 
'Multi-family' proxy presently recofrnized in some states. I'ayment would be made by 
MAP directly to the county either by check or voucher system. 



5157 



IOWA FOOD STAMP PROGRAM— NET INCOME BASIS OF ISSUANCE 



Monthly net income 



Purchase 



Monthly 



Bonus 



Semi-monthly 



Total Purchase 



Bonus 



Total 



6-person household: 

$0to $19.99 

$20 to $29.99 

$30 to $39.99 

$40 to $49.99 

$50 to $59.99 

$60 to $69.99 

$70 to $79.99 

$80 to $89.99 

$90 to $99.99 

$100 to $109.99 

$110 to $119.99 

$120 to $129.99 

$130 to $139.99 

$140 to $159.99 

J160 to $179.99 

$180 to $199.99 

$200 to $219.99 

$220 to $239,99 

$240 to $259.99 

$260 to $279.99 

$280 to $299.99 

$300 to $ 29.99 

$330 to $^59.99 

$360 to $389.99 

TABLE 2. 



$3 


$73 


$76 


$1.50 


$36. 50 


$38 


b 


70 


76 


3.00 


35.00 


38 


10 


70 


80 


5.00 


35.00 


40 


16 


64 


80 


8.00 


32.00 


40 


22 


60 


82 


11.00 


30.00 


41 


28 


56 


84 


14.00 


28.00 


42 


34 


54 


88 


17.00 


27.00 


44 


40 


52 


92 


20.00 


26.00 


46 


44 


52 


96 


22.00 


26.00 


48 


48 


50 


98 


24.00 


25.00 


49 


52 


48 


100 


26.00 


24.00 


50 


56 


46 


102 


28.00 


23.00 


51 


60 


44 


104 


30.00 


22.00 


52 


64 


42 


106 


32.00 


21.00 


53 


68 


40 


108 


34.00 


20.00 


54 


72 


38 


110 


36.00 


19.00 


55 


76 


36 


112 


38.00 


18.00 


56 


80 


34 


114 


40.00 


17.00 


57 


84 


32 


116 


42.00 


16.00 


58 


88 


32 


120 


44.00 


16.00 


60 


92 


32 


124 


46.00 


16.00 


62 


96 


32 


128 


48.00 


16.00 


64 


100 


32 


132 


50.00 


16.00 


66 


104 


32 


136 


52.00 


16.00 


68 


3F 1 


WEEK'S FOOD,' 


JANUARY 1962-U.S.A. 


AVERAGE 





Sex-age groups 



Low-cost 
plan 



Moderate- 
cost plan 



Liberal 
plan 



Families: 

Family of 2, 20 to 34 years 2 

Family of 2, 55 to 74 years^ 

Family of 4, preschool children 3. 

Family of 4, schoolchildren * 

Individuals: ^ 

Children, 7 months to 1 year 

1 to 3 years 

4 to 6 years 

7 to 9 years 

lOto 12 years 

Girls: 

13 to 15 years 

16 to 19 years 

Boys: 

13 to 15 years.. 

16 to 19 years 

Women, 20 to 34 years. 

35 to 54 years 

55 to 74 years.. _ 

75 years and over 

Pregnant... 

Nursing 

Men, 20 to 34 years 

35 to 54 years. __ 

55 to 74 years 

75 years and over 



$13.80 


$18. 80 


$21.30 


12.40 


17.00 


19.00 


20.60 


27.50 


31.50 


23.80 


32.10 


36.60 


3.10 


3.90 


4.20 


3.70 


4.70 


5.30 


4.40 


5.70 


6.80 


5.20 


6.80 


7.80 


6.10 


8.20 


9.40 


6.40 


8.70 


10.00 


6.50 


8.70 


9.90 


7.00 


9.60 


10.90 


8.20 


11.20 


12.60 


5.40 


7.50 


8.50 


5.30 


7.30 


8.30 


5.00 


6.90 


7.80 


4.80 


6.40 


7.30 


6.80 


8.80 


9.80 


8.50 


10.90 


12.10 


7.10 


9.60 


10.90 


6.60 


9.00 


10.10 


6.30 


8.60 


9.50 


6.10 


8.20 


9.10 



1 These estimates were computed from quantities in food plans published In the October 1957 issue of Family Economics 
Review. Quantities for children were revised January 1959 to comply with the 1958 NRC Recommended Dietary Allowances. 
The cost of the food plans was first estimated by using the average price per pound of each food group paid by nonfarm 
survey families at three selected Income levels in 1955. These prices were adjusted to current levels by use of Average 
Retail Prices of Food In 46 Large Cities Combined, released periodically by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

2 10 percent added for family size adjustment. For derivation of factor for adjustment, see September 1960 Issue of 
Family Economics Review. 

> Man and women 20 to 34 years; children, 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 years. 

♦ Man and women 20 to 34 years; children, 7 to 9 and 10 to 12 years. 

5 The costs given are for individuals in 4-person families. For individuals in other size families, the following adjustments 
are suggested: 1-person— add 20 percent; 2-person— add 10 percent; 3-person— add 5 percent; 5-person— subtract 
5 percent; 6-or-more-person— subtract 10 percent. 

Source: Consumer and Food Economics Research Division, ARS, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 



5158 

TABLE 6.— ESTIMATED COST OF 1 WEEK'S FOOD AT HOME' 
(U.S. average, January 1963] 



Sex-age groups > 



Economy 
plan 



Basic low- Second low- Moderate- 
cost plan cost plan cost plan 



Liberal plan 



Children: 

Under 1 year 

1 to 3 years 

4 to 6 years 

7 to 9 years 

10 to 12 years 

Girls: 

13 to 15 years 

16 to 19 years 

Boys: 

13 to 15 years 

16 to 19 years 

Women: 

20 to 34 years 

35 to 54 years 

55 to 74 years 

75 years and over. 

Pregnant 

Nursing 

Men: 

20 to 34 years 

35 to 54 years 

55 to 74 years 

75 years and over. 



$2.50 


$3.10 


$2.70 


$3.90 


$4.20 


3.00 


3.80 


3.20 


4.70 


5.40 


3.50 


4.50 


3.80 


5.80 


6.90 


4.30 


5.30 


4.50 


6.90 


7.90 


5.00 


6.20 


5.20 


8.30 


9.60 


5.40 


6.50 


5.60 


8.90 


10.20 


5.50 


6.60 


5.60 


8.80 


10.10 


5.70 


7.10 


5.80 


9.80 


11.20 


6.70 


8.40 


6.90 


11.40 


12.90 


4.10 


5.50 


4.60 


7.70 


8.70 


4.00 


5.40 


4.50 


7.50 


8.50 


3.80 


5.10 


4.10 


7.00 


8.00 


3.60 


4.90 


4.00 


6.60 


7.50 


5.90 


6.90 


6.00 


9.00 


10.00 


7.20 


8.70 


7.50 


11.10 


12.30 


.40 


7.30 


5.90 


9.90 


11.10 


5.10 


6.80 


5.50 


9.20 


10.30 


4.90 


6.40 


5.20 


8 80 


9.80 


4.70 


6.20 


5.00 


8.40 


9.30 



' These estimated costs were computed from quantities in food plans in tables 1 to 5. Costs are estimated quarterly 
by Consumer and Food Economics Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
Washington, D.C., 20250. Current cost figures available on request. 

2 The costs given are for individuals in four-person families. For other size families, the following adjustments are sug- 
gested: Family of 1— add 20 percent; family of 2— add 10 percent; family of 3— add 5 percent; family of 5— subtract 5 
percent; family of 6 or more subtract 10 percent. 

[From the Cleveland, Ohio Plain Dealer, .Tune 28, 1969] 

Exclusive Migrants Fed Red-Tape Diet 
(By Richard C. Widman, Staff Writer) 

Freemont. Ohio. — If rules and red tape were food, some 6.000 to 8,000 Mexican- 
Ameriran migrant workers who have been made idle in the Sandusky County 
area by an abundance of rainy and cold weather would not be going hungry. 

They think they are entitled to federal food stamps as a right. County officials 
say the rules must be followed, and this takes time. 

Some of the migrants say the farmers have told them there will be work 
within four or five days if the newly arrived dry weather continues. But others 
have been told the ground is so soggy that it will be two or three weeks before 
they can get into the fields even if there is no more rain. 

It is not a "Grapes of Wrath" .situation. The migrants are not starving. 

But their rations of frijoles, tortillas and rice are skimpy. 

"Just give a Mexican some beans and some rice, and a piece of meat now and 
then, and he's happy," one migrant told this reporter. 

But he said his family has not had money for the piece of meat recently, and 
there were not enough beans and rice to go around. He estimated that most of 
the migrants who live in his camp south of Freemont are eating about one third 
less than normal. 

That they are deeply in debt and may go home next fall even more in debt 
is heard from every migrant. 

These are American citizens, most of them from the Rio Grande Valley of 
Texas. When they all get here, at the peak of the harvest seasons in the pickle, 
cabbage, tomato and sugar beet fields, there may be as many as 12,000 migrants 
here in one county. 

Published in this article for the first time are reasons why some 200 micrants 
descended en ma.sse last week on the officer of the Sandusky County Welfare 
Department. Another .500 or more showed up on Tuesday. 

The migrants say the primary rea.son is, of course, very simple. They were 
hungry nnd looking for help. 

But the Sandusky County commissioners and We'fare Director Carleton H. 
Peck susDect that it was some kind of effort to "haras-s" the welf.ire depart- 
ment, and t)erhai)s the beginning of an effort to unionize the migrnnt workers. 

"Xot so." .said Mrs. Nancy B. Kidney, director of the Sandusky County Op- 
portunity Center here, which operates with federal Office of Economic Oppor- 
tunity funds. 



5159 

"We've told the unions to stay away," Mrs. Kidney said. 

She admitted, however, that the visits to the welfare department were indeed 
"confrontations." 

For three years now, Mrs. Kidney said, the county welfare department's rules 
and red tape have made it difficult and sometimes impossible for migrant workers 
to get the help to which they are entitled. 

The situation was aggravated this spring, she said, by wet weather which put 
more workers than ever in need. 

Conserving Sandusky County's general welfare funds is one thing, the center 
director said, but there is no good reason why federal food stamps should not be 
made readily available to the migrants with a minimum of red tape. 

She said some had applied three times for the stamps but were never notified 
they were not to get them, or why. 

Mrs. Kidney said she had tried to meet with welfare director Peck to discuss 
the problem but was rebuffed. The county commissioners told her that she would 
have to deal with Peck, and that the commissioners could not help her, Mrs. 
Kidney said. 

"Fed up" with the situation, she told Daniel Lopez, and Opportunity Center 
aide, to visit the migrant camps and find those who were in need and instruct 
them to go to the county welfare office to apply for aid. 

Police were called to stand by at each "confrontation" but were not needed. 
Peck said the migrants were orderly. 

Mrs. Kidney said that Peck calls the police every time a few migrants show 
up at his office. 

Fifty-two heads of migrant families applied for aid last Friday, and an esti- 
mated 150 on Tuesday. Most asked for food stamps, and some for general wel- 
fare. 

In an interview with this reporter, Peck professed ignorance why the large 
groups visited his office. 

He said he suspected "harassment" buit would not definitely call it that, nor 
did he know why anyone would want to harass his office. 

Peck did not mention the subject of his differences with Opportunity Center 
officials. He professed bewilderment as to what it is all about. 

All applications will be carefully processed. Peck said but he could not esti- 
mate how long it would take for the paper work to be completed. 

Peck pointed out that Sandusky County has budgeted only $62,000 for gen- 
eral welfare this year and said the money would be exhausted quickly if dis- 
pensed indiscriminately. 

He showed the medical payments record for a migrant worker who became 
ill last summer, a total of more than $4,000. 

"One case can run up a big bill," Peck said. 

The welfare director reported that the county commissioners have been 
bombarded by complaints from longtime residents who do not want "their" wel- 
fare money paid out for food and medical care for migrants. 

A county commissioner admitted to this reporter that he had received many 
such calls, but avoided further discussion of the subject. 

About 5,000 Mexican-Americans, formerly migrant workers, are now year- 
round residents of the Fremont area. Peck said. 

Peck said he doubted that the migrants have a need for help now. He doubted 
that they are as broke as they say. 

Growers, the people who hire the migrants, tell hihti they have paid the 
migrants well this year and they should have money in their pockets, the 
welfare director said. 

At the same time. Peck admitted that perhaps the migrants have not had as 
much work as usual because of the wet weather. 

"The trouble with people here," Mrs. Kidney remarked, "is that they think 
these migrants come up here only to get money to drink and have a good time." 

"They don't realize that they have biUs to pay and obligations to meet, here 
and back home where other members of their families are, the same as anyone 
else," she said. 

Opportunity workers said interviews with the migrants revealed that the 
families have run up average debts of $350, in addition to normal debts. 

"People shouldn't have to borrow money to buy food," Mrs. Kidney said. 

Migrants have borrowed money from the farmers for whom they agreed to 
work. The amounts are small, not because the farmers are not willing to lend 
more, but because the migrants hesitate to ask for more. 

"They're sticking together, keeping their problem to themselves until it be- 



5160 

comes a crisis," Mrs. Kidney said. "Self-reliance is a characteristic of these 
l>eople, a character trait we try to teach our own kids." 

Everyone sjx^aks highly of the migrants as hard-working tyi>es. which is why 
county officials, they say, cannot understand why the migrants are asking for 
helix 

"Certification" is the big barrier for the applicant who seeks food stamps. 

In Sandusky County this means the applicant must be able to show his recent 
pay slips and records of his bank deposits and debts in order to establish his 
need. 

"They're asking for verification that these people can't give," Mrs. Kidney in- 
sisted. 

Complicating the problem, the center director said, is Sandusky County's in- 
sistence on weekly recertification. which means that the entire process must he 
gone through again. Some migrants, she said, cannot afford the gasoline to drive 
to the welfare oflBce. 

Other counties are more flexible in regard to food stamp rules, she said. 

"It's not welfare," Lopez remarked. "It's something the people have a right 
to." 

"Why do they have to be degraded and made to feel less than human?" Mrs. 
Kidney asked. 

"Sure other counties are more flexible," countered Robert W. Roush, a San- 
dusky County commissioner. "We're going according to the book because it's the 
law." 

County Commissioner Lee Snow, the chairman said all three commissioners 
believe some attempt is being made to organize the migrants. 

Roush i)ointed to the fact that Bruce E. Thomas of Columbus, head of the 
Ohio Steering Committee for Adequate Welfare, accompanied the migrants to 
the welfare ofiice Tuesday. 

Mrs. Kidney said it was a coincidence that the controversial Thomas was in 
Fremont that day. and said that it was his own idea to accompany them. 

"I've tried to keep the organizers ;iway, to keep this out of the limelight," 
she said. 

The migrants have no complaint about the treatment they are receiving from 
the farmers, or about the housing assigned to them. They .say it is much better 
than it used to be. 

Some food stamp money is trickling through, migrants admitted. But they 
said that it is inadequate. 

To help them in the crisis the center is handing out emergency food orders 
averaging about $15 a family. This money comes from si>ecial federal funds 
reserved for "act of God" emergencies. 

(The average migrant family numbers 7.2 persons, including those here and 
those back home. Mrs. Kidney reported.) 

David Sunderland, agriculturalist for the Northern Ohio Sugar Co.. which 
indirectly employs about fiOO migrants, said they have made good money tliis 
year. He has shown the records to the welfare director Peck. 

Sunderland said he could not understand why they were seeking help. He 
also suspects an organizing effort. 

The migrants denied bavins been contacted bv organi'^ers. They went to the 
welfare ofliice, they said, because they needed help and were told they could 
get it there 

Hope Garcia is a pretty 17-year-old girl from Pharr. Tex. 'With a sMm fisrnre 
she would ap'iear to l)e better suited to working at a drive-in as a carhop rather 
than at tlie backbreaking labor of hoeing fields. 

Asked why she is looking for work in the fields for the third straight year, she 
replied : "It's the way we have to live." 

Last year her father. .To.se Garcia, her mo^^ber. a brother and a ■-■iwtcr m-^de 
a totn] of about $2,000 here. This year Jose and Hope came alone. They have 
made $114 to date most of which was sent back home. 

They borrowed $15 from "our farmer." have received an emergency food order 
and last M'Hidjiy r<'c<'iv('d $S worth of food stamp>< for which they paid $1 cash. 

The father and daughter were told not to apply again until Tuesday. It will 
take more pai^er work and more time to get another authorization for food 
stamps. 

Greg Nava. 20. and his bride. Chris, also are from Pharr. They got here six 
weeks ago and so far have earned a total of $60, which has run out. 

They got an emergency food order and last Monday paid $1 cish for JRS worth 
of food stamps. They can not go back for more food stamps until Tuesday. 



5161 

Department of Agriculture, 

Office of the Secretary, 
Washington, B.C., May 25, 1970. 
Hon. Walter F. Mondale, 
Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, 
Committee an Labor and Public Welfare, 
U.S. Senate. 

Dear Mr. Chairman : We are pleased to supply the information and program 
data that you requested on our family feeding programs and migrant workers 
and their families. 

With respect to our family food assistance programs, we believe that the 
problems associated with the full participation of migrant workers need to be 
viewed in two segments: (1) when the family is residing in its home-base area, 
and (2) when the family is in the migrant stream in user States. 

When the migrant family is in its home base-area, its problems closely re- 
semble those of other low-income families in need of food assistance. A family 
food assistance program must be available in the home-base area and needs to 
be financed and operated by cooperating State and local agencies in a manner 
that will be resiwnsive to the needs of all low-income families in the area, 
including migrant worker families. 

During the past 18 months we have p'aced a top priority on actions to insure 
that all of the 3,129 counties and independent cities in the United States do offer 
food assistance to low-income families either through USDA's Commodity Dis- 
tribution or Food Stamp Programs. As of May 15, we have commitments from 
all but 73 of these 3.129 counties and cities that they will undertake a family 
feeding program. As of the same date, a program was actually oi>erating in 2,849 
counties and independent cities. We expect to shortly obtain a commitment from 
the remaining 73 areas. 

Thus, we do expect to complete the first essential step — program availablility 
on a nationwide basis — in the immediate months ahead. Once this priority task 
is coraiileted, we will need to give increased attention to assisting States and 
localities in achieving the quality of program operations that will make these 
programs truly responsive to program need. 

One step of significance for migrant families has already been taken to im- 
prove program quality in our Commodity Distribution Program. Revised Fed- 
eral regulations were issued that prohibit the establishment of citizenship or 
durational residence requirements in State or local eligibility standards for the 
Commodity Distribution Program. (Citizenship or durational residence require- 
ments were not authorized under the Food Stamp Act of 1964. Thus, no corrective 
action was needed under that program.) 

When the migrant family is in the user stream, the problems are different. In 
part, these problems arise out of the mobility of the migrant worker; the con- 
stantly changing composition of the migrant family as it moves in the migrant 
stream ; and the fluctuations of family income while it travels in user States. Our 
experience indicates that a very large proportion of the migrant worker fami- 
lies have monthly incomes that exceed eligibility standards when they have em- 
ployment in user States. 

Their eligibility for food assistance occurs when they encounter periods of 
unemployment or underemployment — ^because work is not available for all mi- 
grants that come into a user area or because weather conditions have resulted 
in an even shorter-term period when the fields cannot be worked. These rela- 
tively short-term, and difficult-to-predict, needs for food a.ssi.stance present diffi- 
cult problems in programs that are based upon the certification of the economic 
position (the income and resources) of individual family imits. 

At our request, the Cabinet-level Rural Affairs Council is considering what 
actions can be taken, on a coordinated basis by involved Federal agencies, to 
alleviate the problems associated Avith the projected decline in work opportuni- 
ties for migrant workers. We also intend to keep the State agencies administering 
our food assistance programs informed of available intelligence on emerging 
problem areas to assist them in anticipating where needs may quickly develop 
for USDA family food assistance for migrants. 

Sincerely, 

Richard Lyng, Assistant Secretary. 
Enclosures. 



5162 



1. GENERAL QUESTIONS AS TO INFORMATION GATHERING EFFORTS AND CONTINGENCY 
PLANNING FOR MIGRANT NUTRITION PROBLEMS, 

1. (a) HOW DO YOU GATHER STATISTICAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE OVERALL' 
OPERATION OF THE FOOD STAMP AND COMMODITIES DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS? IS 
SUCH DATA USED FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN BUDGETING? IF SO, HOW? HOW MANY 
AGENCY PERSONNEL ARE REGULARLY ASSIGNED TO THE GATHER OF SUCH INFORMATION? 
WHAT WAS YOUR BUDGET REQUEST AND YOUR BUDGET AUTHORIZATION FOR SUCH ACTI- 
VITIES INCLUDING PERSONNEL ESTIMATES FOR FISCAL YEARS 1968, 1969, AND 1970? 



1. (a) 

As part of their agreements with the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) , 
participating areas and States provide regular monthly reports on the size 
and scope of family feeding programs. 

For the Food Stamp Program, a monthly report is submitted by areas 
and States showing the number of households and number of persons partic- 
ipating for the month being reported; the number of households and persons 
participating at the minimum purchase requirement; the amount of the coupons 
distributed, the value of purchased coupons and the value of free coupons. 
These data are reported separately for households classified as assistance 
and non-assistance households. (See attachment 1(a) 1.) Enclosed are 
copies of the compilation of such monthly reports since 1967 (attachment Ka 

A second monthly report is provided by cooperatipg State agencies vjhich 
provides an accounting for the bulk supplies of coupons made available to 
States and for the sums collected from recipients as the charges for the 
coupons. 

For the Commodity Distribution Program, the monthly report submitted 
by areas and States shows the number of certified eligibles; the number of 
participants, classified by assistance and non-assistance categories; and 
the names of the individual commcdities distributed during the month for 



5163 



which the report is submitted, (See attachment 1(a) 3.) Enclosed are the 
monthly reports since 1967 (attachment l(a)4). A second report is sub- 
mitted by States which shows the quantity of various commodities distri- 
buted by type of eligible outlet. (See attachments l(a)5 and l(a)6.) 
These reports, supplemented by spot checks, reviews, audits, and 
special surveys, are basic tools for program evaluation and direction, 
as well as for program accounting and budgetary purposes. As indicated 
above, they are prepared by the cooperating areas and States. They are 
used by field and Washington personnel of FNS as an integral part of 
program supervision and direction and for public reporting. It, therefore, 
is not possible to determine, separately, the number of Federal manhours 
devoted to assisting States and localities in establishing their reporting 
activities, the compilation of such reports, or the portion of supervisory 
time devoted to the evaluation and use of such reports in program direc- 
tion and improvement. 



I 



5164 



1. (b) DO YOU ASSIGN STAFF MEyffiERS TO PERFORM INDEPENDENT EVALUATIONS 
OF COLLECTED DATA FOR PURPOSES OF MONITORING EXISTING PROGRAMS OR AIDING 
CONTINGENCY PLANNING FOR FUTURE OPERATION AND/OR EMERGENCY PLANNING? 
IF NOT, mn NOT? 



Because the use of information on program operations is an integral 
part of program direction and supervision, it has not been deemed to be 
an efficient and effective use of FNS to separate out the evaluation of 
program data from basic responsibility for program operations. The 
Washington headquarters of FNS does, however, maintain a Program Reporting 
Staff which is responsible for the compilation of the program reports 
received from cooperating State agencies. 

FNS does utilize the resources of the research agencies of the 
Department, or contracts with outside agencies to perform special studies 
and surveys of program operations and impacts. The staff of USDA's Office 
of the Inspector General also performs independent audits of FNS programs 
which cover both program and fiscal aspects. 



5165 



1. (c) DO YOU RELY ON RECORDS AND INFORMATION FURNISHED THE DEPARTMENT 
PURSUANT TO RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS OF THE FOOD STAMP ACT, REGULATIONS, 
AND INSTRUCTIONS PROMULGATED THEP^UNDER? IF SO, PLEASE DESCRIBE THE SYSTEM 
EMPLOYED? IF NOT, WHY ARE SUCH AVAILABLE INFORMATION SOURCES NOT REGULARLY 
EMPLOYED IN MONITORING AND PLANNING ACTIVITIES? 



The basic information obtained from cooperating areas and States 
pursuant to the provisions of the Food Stamp Act is described in 
answer 1 (a) . 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A 



5166 



1. (d) IN MAKING PROJECTIONS FOR THE NUTRITIONAL NEEDS OF POPULATION 
GROUPS SUCH AS MIGRANTS, DO YOU CONSIDER OR RELY UPON DATA FURNISHED BY 
ANY OTHER AGENCY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, 
PARTICIPATING STATES, INDEPENDENT RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS, CONGRESSIONAL 
COMMITTEES OR CONTACTS WITH INDIGENOUS MIGRANT GROUPS? IF SO, PLEASE 
PARTICULARIZE INFORMATION SOURCES AND ATTACH SUMMARIES OR COPIES OF ALL 
INFORMATION CONSIDERED IN MAKING PROJECTIONS FOR THIS SUMMER. IF ANY OR 
ALL OF THESE SOURCES HAVE NOT BEEN UTILIZED, WHY NOT? 



The nutritional needs of households eligible for family feeding 
programs are derived from the Recommended Dietary Allowances of the Food 
and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council. Under the Commodity 
Distribution Program, these allowances are used to assist in determining 
the kinds and quantities of food commodities to be made available for 
donation to States. Under the Food Stamp Program, the value of the total 
monthly coupon allotments to be made available to participating households 
is based upon the retail cost of an economy diet plan developed by USDA's 
Agricultural Research Service. 

The above sources are universally regarded as the definitive sources 
of information on the nutritional needs of the U. S. population and the 
cost of adequate diet plans developed from the Recommended Dietary 
Allowances. 



5167 



1. Ce) BASED ON INFORMATION TO WHICH YOU HAVE ACCESS, WHAT IS YOUR BEST 
ESTIMATE OF THE NUTRITIONAL AND EMERGENCY NEEDS OF MIGRATORY WORKERS THIS 
SUMMER? (PLEASE DISCUSS THE ANTICIPATED LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION OF MIGRANTS 
IN FOOD STAMP AND COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS, WHETHER THIS LEVEL CON- 
STITUTES AN INCREASE OR DECREASE OVER THE LAST YEAR, AND THE NATURE AND 
EXTENT OF ANY ANTICIPATED HUNGER EMERGENCIES.) DO YOU HAVE ANY CONTINGENCY 
PLANS BASED ON SUCH INFORMATION. IF SO, PLEASE DETAIL, INCLUDING SPECIFI- 
CATION OF SOURCE OF THE PLAN AND A SUMMARY OF THE OPERATIVE PROVISIONS OR 
TEXT OF -SUCH DOCUMENT. 



We are anticipating that there will be an increased need this year, 
compared to last year, for food assistance among migrant worker families 
because of the projected decline in work opportunities for migrants. 

We would anticipate that some former migrant families will not move 
out of their home-base area and will continue to be eligible for and 
participate in the USDA family feeding program in their home-base area 
this summer. We further anticipate that, compared with last year, a 
larger number of migrants who move into user areas may experience longer 
periods without employment. In addition, we anticipate a continuation, 
and probably an intensification, of temporary periods of unemployment or 
underemployment because weather or other conditions may result in late 
harvest schedules or a temporary stoppage of work in the fields. 

For the unemployed or underemployed migrant worker who elects to 
remain in his home base this summer, food assistance will be available 
through the USDA family food assistance program operating in his home 
county. 

A. Effective January 1970, FNS issued instructions that prohibited 
States and participating areas within States from establishing any dura- 
tional residence or citizenship requirements in their eligibility standards 
for USDA family food programs. This action was of special significance for 
the migrant family. 



5168 



B. FNS has undertaken an intensified program in the past year to 
bring all of the 3,129 counties and independent cities in the United States, 
into a family feeding program — either Commodity Distribution or the Food 
Stamp Program. In a furtherance of this effort, it is deferring all 
requests for the Food Stamp Program from areas that operate a full-coverage 
commodity program so that food stamp funds available for geographic program 
expansion may be made available to begin a stamp program in areas without 
a USDA food program or areas that operate a partial commodity program. 

As of May 15, there remained only 73 counties and independent cities 
that have not made a commitment to begin a family feeding program. There 
were an additional 208 such areas that had agreed to begin a program but 
had not completed local arrangements for the distribution of commodities 
or the issuance of food stamps. 

With an anticipation that we will shortly receive a commitment from 
the remaining 73 counties and independent cities, FNS intends to work 
with States to place a priority on the implementation of programs in any 
non-operating areas where migrants are an important factor. 

A. For the workers who move in the migrant stream, food assistance 
can be made available through the USDA family food assistance program 
operating in the area in which the migrant is faced with unemployed periods. 
Through the Special Task Force of the Cabinet-level Rural Affairs Council, 
USDA is' working with other Federal agencies to develop and coordinate 
Federal programs to assist migrants during this summer. 

B. FNS is alerting State cooperating agencies to the projected increase 
in unemployment among migrants in user areas, now that preliminary projec- 
tions of the possible problem areas are available. It has also been working 
with the Farm Labor Service of the Department of Labor to receive continuing 



5169 



Intelligence as to the emerging potential problem areas as the season 
progresses so that cooperating State agencies may be alerted. 

C. Cooperating State agencies will be encouraged to make full use 
of existing authorities to make preliminary certification determinations 
which permit households with an immediate need for food assistance to be 
certified for a 30-day period while final verification of eligibility is 
being documented. 

D. Through the Special Task Force of the Rural Affairs Council, 
FNS has recommended that all Federal, State and other agencies concerned 
with migrant workers within user States be provided with the names of 
the State agencies responsible for intrastate administration of the 
Commodity Distribution and Food Stamp Programs. This recommendation was 
made to the Council in an effort to improve intrastate communication 
channels concerning emerging problem areas. 



5170 



1. (f) DOES YOUR DEPARTMENT CONSIDER MIGRANTS TO BE A SPECIAL CLASS 
REQUIRING SPECIAL TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES TO ENABLE THEM TO PARTICI- 
PATE IN FOOD STAMP AND COMMODITY PROGRAMS? 



With respect to family feeding programs, FNS believes there is a 
distinction between the migrant worker family when it is in its home 
base and when it is in the migrant stream. 

When the migrant family is residing in its home base , the unemployed 
or underemployed migrant family more closely resembles other needy families^ 
in the area. Efforts here are directed to the broad problems of making 
the existing family assistance program responsive to the needs of all 
eligible households in the area. For the first time, USDA is now making 
Federal funds available to States under the Commodity Distribution Program 
to assist States to begin a program in those areas that were not operating 
a family feeding program and to improve the level of services in operating 
areas. (The extent of Federal contributions for intrastate costs of 
operating the Food Stamp Program are set forth in the Food Stamp Act and 
have been available since the Act was passed in 1964.) 

Migrant workers and their families while in the migrant stream do 
present special problems because of: (1) their mobility; (2) the 
frequently short-term and unpredictable patterns of their need for food 
assistance; (3) the constantly changing composition of the migrant family 
as it moves in the migrant stream;and (4) the difficulty of projecting 
the current incomes of individual migrant families. The latter two factors 
are of special significance in the Food Stamp Program because the level 
of coupon charges and the amount of the Federal assistance (the bonus 
coupons) is related to the current income and size of the family. 

These problems are enhanced, currently, because eligibility standards 
for family feeding programs are related to State welfare standards and, 
thus, vary from State to State. 



5171 



The Administration, in its proposed amendments to the Food Stamp 
Act, has requested that these State-by-State standards be replaced by 
uniform national eligibility standards. When authorized, eligibility 
standards for the Commodity Distribution Program would be changed to 
the uniform standards authorized for the Food Stamp Program. 



5172 



1. (g) HAS THERE EVER BEEN A STUDY OF THE SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF 
MIGRANTS TO DETERMINE WHETHER SPECIAL ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS CAN BE APPLIED 
IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE OF THE FOOD STAMP SEGMENT OF THE 
POPULATION, AND WHAT THOSE STANDARDS SHOULD BE? IF NOT, WHY NOT? 

Yes. The Food and Nutrition Service has had an informal Task 
Force, representing staff involved with both family and child feeding, 
that has been studying the problems of migrant workers. Members of this 
Task Force have made field inspections and have worked with other Federal 
agencies concerned with the migrant worker and his family. 

The Task Force has concluded, because of the factors outlined in 
1 (f) above, the regular eligibility and certification procedures provided 
for in the Food Stamp Act do create special problems for the migrant worker 
family, especially when the family is in user areas. Even legislation to 
make possible the establishment of uniform national eligibility standards 
would not eliminate all such problems. 

Study has been given, assuming that uniform national eligibility 
standards were authorized, to the possibility of annual certifications 
in the home-base areas, based upon past Income patterns and the probability 
that such patterns would continue in the then-current season. However, 
such certifications would only Identify the probable "annual average" 
position of the migrant family with respect both to Income and family 
size. Thus, It would still be necessary to identify the current income 
and size of such households as they move into the migrant stream to 
determine the charges to be made for the coupons and the value of the 
total coupon allotment to be provided as well as the expected duration 
of the unemployment or underemployment. 



5173 



The necessity of making such determination on a current basis, and 
on an individual household basis, is essential if the Food Stamp Program 
is to be practically available to migrant families while they are in the 
migrant stream. These same two factors also present special staffing 
problems to the participating States and localities when a significant 
number of migrant workers face a very short-term need for food assistance 
because of weather or other unpredictable factors. 

FNS is currently participating, as a supporting agency, in a 
program being conducted by the Rural Manpower Service of the Department 
of Labor, known as the Experimental and Development Program for Migrants. 
This project will identify approximately 750 migrant families from 
Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, Texas, and will follow these families 
through the migrant stream in northern user States and through their 
return to the Rio Grande Valley. It is hoped that the data collected 
on these study families may point the way to more effective eligibility 
and certification procedures for migrants under our family feeding 
programs. 



5174 



2. FOOD STAMP AND COMMODITY PARTICIPATION, DATA REQUESTED FOR FISCAL 
YEARS 1967, 1968, AND 1969, AND THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR: 

2. (a) A BREAKDOra AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PUBLIC 
ASSISTANCE AND NON-PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PARTICIPANTS IN THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM 
FOR FISCAL YEARS 1967, 1968, AND THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IF AVAILABLE, IN 
ALL STATES THAT ARE EITHER "HOME BASE" OR "USER" STATES OF MIGRANT AND 
SEASONAL FARM LABOR. SIMILARLY, PROVIDE TABLES SHOWING THE RATIO OF PUBLIC 
ASSISTANCE AND NON-PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BENEFICIARIES IN THOSE STATES FOR THE 
ABOVE LISTED YEARS. 



Copies of the monthly reports for both the Food Stamp and Commodity 
Distribution Programs have been provided in attachments 1(a) 1 and l(a)2. 



5175 



2. (b) A BREAKDOWN AND ANALYSIS WITH RESPECT TO MIGRANTS AND SEASONAL 
LABORERS WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE NON-PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS IN THE 
SAME FORMAT AS PROVIDED FOR (a). 



Such data are not available. 



2. (c) IF THE UNDERLYING STATISTICS AND OTHER DATA ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO 
ANSWER PARTS (a) AND (b) OF THIS QUESTION, EXPLAIN IN DETAIL THE REASONS 
FOR THE UNAVAILABILITY. ALSO DISCUSS THE ASSUMPTIONS, EMPIRICAL DATA, OR 
OTHER BASES GOVERNING YOUR ADMINISTRATION OF THESE PROGRAMS. 



It has not been deemed feasible or practical to request States and 
areas to identify and classify the categories of participants, or the 
reasons for their eligibility beyond identifying such families as being 
welfare or non-welfare families. Such a requirement would be both time- 
consuming and costly for the States, with Innumerable problems of 
classification, e.g., even in the single matter of distinguishing between 
seasonal and migrant laborers, or accurately identifying migrant workers 
in their home-base area. It is deemed that increased State and local 
staff time and operating budgets should be devoted to improving recipient 
services rather than to a more complex and detailed reporting service. 



5176 



2. (d) IN LIEU OF STATISTICAL DATA OR SUPPLEMENTAL THERETO, DESCRIBE 
C&MS'S MONITORING SYSTEM, IF ANY AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL, TAKING 
INTO ACCOUNT ALL STATE AND LOCAL DEVIATIONS. 



In addition to the use of the above reports on the scope of family 
feeding operations, FNS monitors program operations through the following: 

(a) On-the-spot monitoring by field and regional offices of FNS; 

(b) Administrative reviews of State agency operations; 

(c) Investigations of specific complaints received, including 
those from individual recipients; 

(d) Independent audits or investigations of the Office of the 
Inspector General or the General Accounting Office; and 

(e) Special studies and surveys. 






5177 



2.(e) IN STATES WHERE THERE IS A HIGH DEGREE OF MIGRANT PARTICIPATION 
IN NON-PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR THE ABOVE YEARS, WERE SPECIAL 
PROCEDURES EMPLOYED FOR CERTIFYING MIGRANTS? IF SO, PLEASE DESCRIBE, 
MAKING REFERENCES TO RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS (3) WHERE APPROPRIATE. IF 
NOT, PLEASE EXPLAIN: 



Based upon operating experience, the capacity to serve the food 
assistance needs of migrants when they lack employment in the migrant 
stream is based upon the extent of advance intelligance of potential 
emergency problems and the fiscal and administrative capacity of the 
State and/or local operating agencies to increase certification and other 
staff to meet the sudden influx of migrant worker families in need of food 
assistance, through the assignment of additional personnel, added costs 
of overtime work, etc. The use of the previously discussed preliminary 
certification procedures also is important where a prompt response is 
necessary to meet short-duration needs. 



5178 



2. (f) HAVE ANY SUCH PROCEDURES BEEN DEVELOPED IN THE DEPARTMENT AND 
RECOMMENDED TO THE STATES TO AID THEM IN EXPEDITING CERTIFICATION OF 
MIGRANTS? 



As previously discussed, FNS is alerting States to the general 
nature of the anticipated migrant worker problem this summer and will 
provide them with the available projections of anticipated problem areas. 
It will encourage States to make effective use of preliminary certifica- 
tion procedures and will cooperate with other agencies in attempting to 
develop continuous intelligence on emerging problem areas. 



5179 



2. (g) WHAT REGULATIONS HAVE YOU DEVELOPED TO INSURE THAT STATES 
PARTICIPATING IN THE COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM PARTICIPATE FULLY, 
BY DISTRIBUTING ALL ITEMS ON THE USDA LIST? 



Some States and local jurisdictions have had physical and fiscal 
constraints that have prevented them from distributing certain foods, 
such as insufficient warehousing facilities, lack of refrigeration for 
perishable commodities, or lack of enough vehicles for transporting 
commodities. In addition, some States report that local eating habits 
(i.e.. New York State and other northern States just cannot, at this 
time, make proper utilization of available com grits), make it impractical 
to order and attempt to handle certain of the available commodities. As 
better nutrition education becomes available to all participants, it is 
hoped by the Department that each participating State agency will be 
able to accept and utilize the maximum available commodities. 

Through the use of recently authorized money (Operating Expense 
Funds for States) , the Department hopes to encourage State distributing 
agencies to participate more fully in the distribution program by 
distributing the maximum number of items available from the Department 
of Agriculture. 



5180 



2. (h) WHAT INSTRUCTIONS, IF ANY, HAVE YOU ISSUED TO THE STATES TO 
ENCOURAGE SUCH FULL PARTICIPATION? IF NO SUCH INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN 
ISSUED, PLEASE EXPLAIN REASONS FOR NOT ENCOURAGING FULL PARTICIPATION? 

We do issue Guidelines for use by the States in issuing commodities. 
These Guidelines are periodically adjusted as new foods become available. 
A copy of the Guidelines is attachment 2(h)l. 

Also attached is CD-Sc70 which provides the amount of each food 
per person that was available as of April 1, 1970, (2(h)2). 



5181 



3. OUTREACH EFFORTS FOR FOOD STAMP AND COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS 

3. (a) FOR THE YEARS AND STATES DISCUSSED ABOVE, V/HAT STATISTICAL METHODS 
ARE EMPLOYED TO MONITOR OUTREACH EFFORTS BY LOCAL OFFICIALS IN COOTTTIES 
IMPACTED WITH MIGRANTS? IF SUCH DATA IS NOT EMPLOYED, WHAT ADMINISTRATIVE 
MONITORING DEVICES ARE EMPLOYED? 

Answer ; 

Outreach programs are not monitored through a regu.lar reporting system. 
Much of the outreach program is conducted as part of the expanded nutri- 
tional program for which the Agriculture Extension Service is responsible. 
Staff members, on a trip to Hidalgo County, Texas, which provides a sub- 
stantial number of migrants for user States, visited with the Home Demon- 
stration Agent responsible for the expanded new nutrition program in the 
county. She has 29 nutritional aides all of whom speak Spanish and make 
working visits to needy migrant families. These nutritional aides and 
the Home Demonstration Agent have done a remarkable job in teaching the 
migrants how to use the Department's donated foods. 

The expanded nutrition program uses nutritional aides hired from the 
poverty population who speak the language of the households where they 
make working visits. These are face-to-face consultations in v/hich the 
homemakers are educated to use either Food Stamps or commodities. The 
material in attachments 3(a)l and 3(a)2 is evidence that this program is 
meeting some degree of success. 

The Cooperative Extension Service began an educational program, the Expanded 
Pood and Nutrition Education Program about 18 months ago designed to help 
the hard-to-reach poor ijnprove their diets. Special efforts have been 
made to extend the program to minority racial groups, migrants, and others 
v/ith special problems. 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 14 



5182 



Program aides who live in the community in which they work and who can 
communicate verbally vath the families to be reached are employed and 
extensively trained in basic nutrition, meal planning, food biiying, food 
preparation, management of their resources, use of food assistance programs, 
and other community resources. 

As of February 28, 1970, 6,356 aides were employed in nearly 1,000 loca- 
tions. More than 460,000 families have been worked with since the begin- 
ning of the program. It is anticipated that by June 30, 1970, the number 
of aides will reach about 7,500, who will be working in more than 1,000 
locations. As more funds become available, the program will be further 
expanded with more aides and to new locations. 

While not singled out as a specific target group, the Expanded Food and 
Nutrition Program has reached migrant families both at home base and as 
they follow the crops. The following excerpts taken from reports from 
Florida and Texas are typical of work done in other States as well. 

Extension aides working the Food and Nutrition Education Program of the 
Cooperative Extension Service have worked with migrant families in Texas 
and Florida since the beginning of the program early in 1969 . 

In Polk County, Florida, the v/ife of a migrant group leader v/orks as an 
Extension aide with about twenty families, some migrants. \Vlien some 
migrant families leave for the summer the homemaker asks the aide to resume 
v/ork v/ith them when they return, and several have asked to be referred to 
Extension aides in locations v/here they v/ill harvest crops during the 
spring and summer. 



5183 



The following is taken from a Texas report, October, 1969: "In two 
counties bordering Mexico, Cameron and Hidalgo, Texas, twenty-nine aides 
worked with 215 migrants out of 2,168 families enrolled in 1969. This 
work was done between January and August. In one of these counties 36 
families that had formerly been migrants did not leave this year. 

"Five of the aides had been migrants. One said she would have been a 
migrant if she had not been an aide. Another was angry with her husband 
because he was sitting around rather than getting a job in the areas. She 
•felt that if there v/as a job for her, that probably there was a job he 
could do also. ' . 

"The aides visited the migrant families on an average of twice a month 
and taught: Nutrition, meal planning; food budgeting, selection and buy- 
ing; food preparation; safety; storage and sanitation; gardening in 
rural areas. 

"They counseled with families on the many services available and where 
to go for them. Consequently, many children were immunized. Others 
v/ere given badly needed medical and financial assistance by different 
. organizations and agencies. 

"The older homemakers believed milk v/as for children, and that salads 
including potato salads were for 'iveddings. Many of the homemakers had 
started making salads for family meals. One homemaker said that v/hen she 
went to the grocery store she would think of v/hat the aide had taught her. 



5184 



"In one county, forty of the 124 migrant families received donated foods. 
When the aides started working they observed that the families had shared 
their donated foods with other families. But after the aides had worked 
a while, they noticed that the families stopped sharing and started using 
all the foods in their own meals. The women started baking so much of 
their own bread that a small Mexican bakery complained that they did not 
buy their breads any more and the women were feeling a bit guilty. 

"In one county where the aides were working with an average of 40 migrant 
families over the six months period many 'changes were reported. I will 
give you examples taken from the records. Thirteen families planned and 
prepared meals according to the basic four; 7 were eating breakfast who 
had not eaten the meal previously; 35 v/ere serving more vegetables at 
meal time; 15 were serving more salads; 5 were drinking milk, 6 were 
serving more cheese in meals; all receiving donated foods were making 
better use of them; 5 were cooking meat properly, 35 were cooking vege- 
tables properly; 20 were making their own bread and cookies instead of 
buying at the store; and 15 v/ere making their own master mix instead of 
buying biscuits and pancalces. 

"All 40 had improved food storage by using large tight sealed containers 
for flour and cereals; storing vegetables and bread properly; keeping 
powdered egg mix in the refrigerator after opening; storing food and 
equipment in the kitchen area. 

"Twelve of the faniilies started buying for cash instead of credit and all 
started doing comparative food shopping. . 



5185 



"All improved sanitation in some way. Some of the things done included 
regular cleaning of refrigerator and range; a cleaner and neater kitchen; 
lids on garbage cans; insect and rodent control (demonstrated by county 
agricultural agent); washing hands before preparing food and eating; and 
proper dish washing. 

"As a result of the program the agents have had requests for recipes for 
using donated or low-cost foods from San Antonio, California, V/yoming, 
Michigan, and Ohio. One aide sent two copies of recipes to a family that 
had moved to Yorktcwn where there were no aides. The recipes were useful 
and it was helpfiil to have many of them written in English and Spanish and 
in simple language. 

"It has been reported that husbands like the changes in their homes. They 
said "the food is better, the wife cares about her appearance, and the 
house looks better." So naturally they looked forward to more visits from 
the aides. 

"The aides reported observing that the families were dressed better and 
cleaner. 

"Some homemakers wanted to learn to prepare foods they could sell to 
single migrant men who live in compounds and sometimes prepare their own 
food. 

"One of the aides in one of the counties had a letter from a Health Depart- 
ment Home Economist at V/oodstov/n, New Jersey wanting to know what she had 
taught a migrant homemal-cer so she could do follow-up work vath her. The 
ap-ent sent her this information but to date had no further ir-formation." 



5186 



The agents reported that the aides asked the migrants to remember what 
they had been taught and eat by the four food groups if possible. The 
aides continued to work with these families when they returned home. On 
April 1, 1970, 1,583 families were enrolled in the Pood and Nutrition 
Program and on April 30, 1970, 244 of these had started their annual 
journey to harvest crops elsewhere. (Hidalgo County, Texas) 



See attachments 3(a)l and 3(a)2, 



3. (b) HOW IS THE EPPECTIVEI^IESS OP THE PROGRAM JUDGED? IS ANY PORM OP 
COtCPLAINT OR GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AVAILABLE? IP SO, DESCRIBE WITH 
PARTICULARITY. 

Answer ; 

Refer to 4. (b). 

3. (c) ARE THERE ANY P.IANDATORY STANDARDS RELATIVE TO OUTREACH PERSONNEL 
FURNISHED BY PARTICIPATING STATES? IP SO, DO THESE STANDARDS TAKE INTO 
ACCOUITT THE PARTICULAR CHARACTERISTICS OP MIGRANTS? IP NOT, V/HY NOT? 

Answer ; 

There are no mandatory standards; but we have tried to recrLu.t from the 
poverty population persons v/ith the same language, speech, and work back- 
grounds as migrants in order to bridge the communication gap. This is 
also done for other target groups such as the aged, Indians, and tenant- 
farmers . 



5187 



3. (d) HAS THE DEPAETI/ENT GIVEN CONSIDERATION TO REQUIRIITG OR SUGGESTING 
THE UTILIZATION OP IinDIGENOUS ICGRANT GROUPS OR ORGANIZATIONS SERVING 
MIGRANTS TO ASSIST IN OUTREACH EFFORTS? IF NOT, VfflY NOT? 

Answer ; 

Yes, this has been done using individuals and groups of individuals, 
through the use of pamphlets, and Handbooks for Volunteers. See attach- 
ments labeled 3(d). A concerted effort is being made to attain a greater 
involvement with the communities with reference to the needs of migrants. 
Use has been made of Vista Volunteers, church groups, 4-H Clubs, and a 
number of other volunteer groups. 

4. CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR POOD STAMP AND COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION 
PARTICIPATION 

4. (a) IN AREAS IMPACTED WITH MIGRANTS, Vi/HAT STEPS HAS THE DEPARTMENT 
TAKEN TO ENCOURAGE THE COUl-ITIES TO MAICE ADJUSTMENTS IN DOCUMEilTATION 
PROCEDURES, OFFICE HOURS, SIZE OP STAFF, NUMBER OF SPANISH- SPEAKING OR 
BILINGUAL PERSONNEL, OR OTHER SPECIAL ARRANGEt.lENTS THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE 
THE NEEDS OP MIGRANTS? 

Answer ; 

It has been a policy of long standing in the Department that States establish 

eligibility requirements for family feeding programs based on broad Federal 

guidelines vfcLch will apply to all applicants and participants. Under 

normal circumstances, migratory workers and their families participate 

in our food assistance programs as "needy" persons, and are certified 

(whether employed or not) on the same basis as other needy households. 

The responsibility to adjust docujnentation procedures, office hours, size 
of staff, or other arrangements, rests vri.th State agencies and changes 
are approved by the Department. Conditions which warrant specific action 



5188 



I 



in this area are normally brought about through on-site reviews by State 
personnel responsible for monitoring local program operations, Federal 
reviewers, public officials, or private citizens or groups. 

When specific circumstances are brought to the attention of the States 
or the Department, every effort is made to simplify certification and to 
expedite food distribution to migrants or other groups in unusual or dis- 
tress situations. Examples of such adjustments are shown in attachment 

4(a)l. 

I 

Recently, the Department made available to States participating in the 
Commodity Distribution Program Operating Expense Funds to expand and 
improve their Commodity Distribution Programs, but some States have not 
as yet taken advantage of the offer. The Instruction issued to States 
on the use of these fimds includes a section on "Standards of Excellence 
for Needy Family Distribution Programs." This section contains the 
desirable criteria v/hich the. Food and Nutrition Service has determined 
to represent an exemplary Commodity Distribution Program. A copy is 
attached and labeled 4(a)2. As previously pointed out, the responsibility 
for operation still rests v/ith the States and local communities. 

State and local jurisdictions have made special distribution arrangements 
for dense migrant areas by an increase in the number of issuance days, an 
increase in the number of open hours per day both for certification and 
issuance, issuance commensurate with the work day of the applicaiits, certi- 
fications made in the growing areas, and establishment of seasonal itineran^ 
certification locations. 



5189 



In order to overcome physical barriers to participation such as those 
found in Colorado, some counties have agreed to do certification and 
issuance for adjacent counties. Such arrangements do come from the local 
units of government involved. 

4. (b) DOES THE DEPARTMENT REQUIRE OR PERMIT A GRIEVAjJJCE AND/OR HEARING 
PROCEDURE FOR MIGRANTS REFUSED CERTIFICATION? IF NOT, WHY NOT? 

Answer ; 

The Department's Food Stamp and Commodity Distribution Programs Regulations 
were amended April 9, 1969, and April 3, 1970, respectively. These Amend- 
ments require that State Plans of Operation provide a fair hearing to 
households whose claims for food assistance have been denied or are not 
acted upon with reasonable promptness; or who are aggrieved by an agency's 
interpretation of any provision of the plan. The Regulations apply to 
all applicants and participating households, including migrants. 

Now that the Supreme CoLurt has ruled on the Goldberg versus Kelley, ante, 
case (Maxch 23, 1970), Food and Nutrition Service is in the process of 
issuing a policy instruction to States setting forth minimum standards to 
be followed in conducting fair hearings. 



5190 



4. (c) HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONSIDERATION TO THE DEVELOPING OF STANDARD 
TABLES TO AID THE DOCUl'IENTATION AND COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE PURPOSES 
OF CERTIFICATION AND ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS (e.g., TABLES DEFINING 
MIGRANTS' INCOME ON YEARLY OR QUARTERLY BASIS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT PERIODS 
NOT WORKED AND \a'm DEDUCTION FOR NORMAL EXPENSES SUCH AS TRAVEL, RENT, 
ETC.)? IF NOT, WHY NOT? HAVE ANY ALTERNATIVES TO REQUIRING MIGRANTS TO 
OBTAIN AND CARRY COMPREHENSIVE RECORDS FROM EACH EMPLOYER OR CREW LEADER 
BEEN CONSIDERED? IF NOT, WHY NOT? 



Consideration has been given to the development of such standard 
tables but it has not been deemed to be a feasible approach. Such an 
approach can provide a broad statistical measure of the expected or prob- 
able "average" position of an "average" migrant worker family when it is 
in the migrant stream. However, the period of most critical need for the 
migrant family is when he is faced with relatively short-term unemploy- 
ment or underemployment when he is in the user States. Under such 
circumstances, it is the immediately current position for the individual 
family that is important rather than the "average" position for the "typical" 
family. An additional factor is the ever-changing composition of the 
migrant family during the time it is following the crops. 

There is, at present, no requirement for the migrant to carry com- j 
prehensive records from each employer or crew leader. It has not been 
deemed practical or feasible to set forth such a requirement. Nonetheless, 
the mobility of the migrant family and the substantial numbers of employers 
for whom he and other family members may have worked does present especially 
difficult problems in programs which use household income as a determinant 
of eligibility and the amount of the Federal food subsidy. 



I 



5191 



4. (d) HAVE ANY TECHNIQUES FOR CERTIFICATION ON A LEVEL WIDER THAN COUNTY- 
BY-COUNTY BASIS BEEN CONSIDERED OR RECOMMENDED TO PARTICIPATING STATES? 
IF SO, WHAT TECHNIQUES AND VfflAT RESULTED PROM SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS? 

Answer: 



The use of an ID card which would identify the migrant household as eli- 
gible and which would be accepted by all jurisdictions was considered and 
rejected: one, the household composition of the migrants does not remain 
constant throughout the crop season; two, the nature of the local units 
of government in administering the programs is autonomous; and three, 
eligibility standards are not currently imiform for all jurisdictions of 
government. 



4. (e) HAS A STANDARD QUESTIONAIRE GOVERNING CERTIFICATION OF NON-PUBLIC 
ASSISTANCE APPLICATIONS BEEN CONSIDERED OR PROPOSED TO PARTICIPATING STATES 
TO MAKE THE CERTIFICATION PRACTICE RELATING TO MIGRANTS MORE UNIFORM AND 
SPEEDIER? IF SO, DESCRIBE IN DETAIL BY STATE SO USING. IP NOT, WHY NOT? 

Answer: 



No standard questionnaire has been developed because no single standard 
would satisfy the requirements of the several States. The local juris- 
dictions of the various States are autonomous with respect to certification 
and issuance procediires as long as th&y meet the minimum requirements of the 
State plan of operation. 



4. (f) HAS THE DEPARTMENT EVER RECOffi/EENDED THAT COUNTY V.ELFARE OFFICE 
PERSOmffiL LOCATED IN COUNTIES ITCACTED WITH MIGRANTS HE GIVEN SPECIAL TFuAIN- 
ING TO DEAL WITH ICEGRANTS? HAS IT DEVELOPED ANY TRAINING PROGRAIdS TO AID 
LOCAL V/ELPARE OFFICIALS IN DEALING WITH THE PROBLEMS OP CERTIFYING AND PRO- 
VIDING FOOD STAI.IPS TO MIGPJUITS? 

AnsY/er; 

No. 



5192 



5. REJECTIONS AND DECERTIFICATIONS (INCLUDING ONES BASED ON FAILURE TO 
REGULARLY PARTICIPATE IN THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM) FOR FOOD STAMP AND 
COMMODITY RECIPIENTS. 

5. (a) HOW MANY PERSONS IN THE AFOREMENTIONED YEARS AND STATES HAVE BEEN 
REJECTED OR DECERTIFIED? ARE TABLES PROVIDING A DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF THE 
FOREGOING AVAILABLE? HOW MANY OF THESE PERSONS IN EACH CATEGORY WERE 
MIGRANTS? 



The Department of Agriculture does not require States and localities 
to report to it on the results of the millions of certification actions 
undertaken each year in dealing with hundreds of thousands of applicant 
households. 

FNS' monitoring activities and the audit activities of the Office 
of the Inspector General do include appropriate reviews of the certifica- 
tion actions of certifying agencies to insure that they are in conformance 
with Federal regulations and State Plans of Operation. 



5. (b) WERE ANY DECERTIFIED OR REJECTED PARTICIPANTS AFFORDED A GRIEVANCE 
PROCEDURE AND/OR HEARING? IF SO, WERE SUCH GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES OR HEARINGS 
BEFORE OR AFTER THE ADVERSE ACTION? 



See answer to questions 4. (b) and 5. (a). 



5. (c) ARE THERE STATISTICS FOR THE SAME YEARS AS TO THE NUMBER OF FOOD 
STAMP PARTICIPANTS DECERTIFIED FOR LACK OF REGULAR PARTICIPATION? HOW 
MANY AND IN IffllCH STATES VrfERE MORE THAN .05% OF THOSE PERSONS MIGRANTS? 



As indicated in 5 (a) , it would be an impossible reporting burden 
to require the States to report on the details of millions of certifi- 
cation actions carried out each year. However, the requirements for 
regular participation are of the least significance for categories such 



5193 



as migrant workers and others with seasonal or other short-term need 
for assistance. Typically, when the migrant family is following the 
crops, it will have intermittent eligibility — generally in those periods 
of relatively short-term unemployment or underemployment. In the case 
of families that move on and off the program with shifting earnings and 
employment — and especially as such families travel from State to State — 
the regular participation policy has little applicability. 



5194 



6. MISCELLANEOUS QUESTIONS 

6. (a) PLEASE DETAIL MANDATORY AND PERMISSIVE REQUIREMENTS AND PRACTICES 
RELATING TO HARDSHIP PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO MIGRANTS (e.g., EXCESSIVE 
COSTS FOR RENT, TRANSPORTATION, MEDICAL CARE, ETC.,) AND PROCEDURES FOR 
EMERGENCY CERTIFICATION FOR FOOD STAMPS OR COMMODITIES, 

6. (b) IF BOTH PROVISIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN ALL STATE PLANS OR IF THE 
PROVISIONS OR PRACTICES THEREUNDER VARY, PLEASE EXPLAIN IN DETAIL? 



Attached (see 6(b)l and 6(b) 2) are listings, by Regions, of State 
requirements on hardship and emergency certification provisions. 



6. (c) ARE SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS MADE FOR THE SALE OF FOOD STAMP COUPONS 
OR FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF COMMODITIES TO MEET THE PROBLEMS OF MIGRANTS 
WHOSE HOURS OF WORK, REGULARITY OF EMPLOYMENT, AND OTHER BASIC NEEDS VARY 
FROM DAY TO DAY AND MONTH TO MONTH? IF NOT, WHY NOT? 



Refer to 4. (a) 



5195 



6. (d) WHY HAS THE DEPARTMENT NOT ISSUED FORMAL INSTRUCTIONS AS TO 
REPUDIATING THE RESIDENCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATION IN FOOD STAMP 
PROGRAMS AS IT RECENTLY DID FOR THE COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM (FNS(CD) 
INSTRUCTION 707-9)? WHY WAS THE COMMODITY INSTRUCTION DELAYED FOR ALMOST 
A YEAR AFTER THE SUPREME COURT'S DISAVOWAL OF RESIDENCY AS A CONDITION FOR 
ELIGIBILITY FOR WELFARE BENEFITS? WHAT IS THE ANTICIPATED IMPACT OF THE 
BROADENING OF THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE COM- 
MODITIES DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM? WILL IT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE OPERATION 
OF THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM? UPON WHAT BASIS DO YOU RELY IN FORECASTING 
SUCH AN IMPACT? 



Benefiting from the experience of the Commodity Distribution Program, 
when the Food Stamp Act was initiated in 1964, durational residence require- 
ments were not included in the legislation. Therefore, there is no need 
for their deletion. 

The Supreme Court prohibited durational residence as a condition of 
eligibility for federally-aided public assistance programs. Steps were 
subsequently taken by FNS to use that decision as the basis for amending 
the Commodity Distribution Regulation to comply with the Court's decision, 
because food assistance eligibility is based on State welfare requirements. 
Bureau of the Budget Circular A-85 requires a 45- to 60-day notice to 
public interest groups representing State and local governments before 
approval and publication of regulation changes. The Department received 
clearance on the proposed regulation prohibiting citizenship and durational 
residence requirements through the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental 
Relations on September 24, 1969. 

The Regulation was approved on November 21, 1969, and published in 
the Federal Register on November 26, 1969. After interdepartmental 
clearance (including several revisions), FNS (CD) Instruction 707-9 was 
distributed to State program agencies in January 1970. 



5196 



The favorable impact on participation resulting from prohibiting 
citizenship and durational residence requirements can be expected since 
it removes a previous barrier to participation. 

Durational residence requirements were never included in the Food 
Stamp Program; therefore, it will not be affected by the change. 



5197 

Michigan Migrant Ministry, Inc. 

Lansing, Mich., August 1, 1969. 
Mr. BoREN Chertkov, 
Office of Senator Walter F. Mondale, 
Senate Office Building, 
Washington, D.C. 

Dear Mr. Chertkov : Barry Lando of the Chicago OflSce of CBS News informed 
me of your interest in the abuse of winos on the Michigan farm labor scene. 

The fault is mine that you did not hear of this case study directly instead of 
through the news media. The New York oflftce of the National Council of Churches 
Department of Justice had instructed me to send copies of the case study to Sen- 
ator Mondale, and I had neglected to do so. 

Enclosed with this you will find a case study on Wardell Williams, and the 
minutes of a meeting in which the ofBcials of Van Buren County, Michigan at- 
tempted to deal with a similar situation in two camps in their own county. 

If you should desire some contact from Michigan for testimony concerning the 
migrant farm labor scene, I would be happy to supply you with names. 
Very truly yours, 

William G. Benallaok, 

State Director. 
Bmclosures. 

Wardell Williams, Migrant Crew Lel^der 

September 8, 1968. — Five Indian men and one Negro man left the Charles 
Schwynn farm labor camp at 13543 Statler Road, two miles east of Blissfleld in 
Lenawee County. They appeared at the Mennonite Church in Adrian seeking 
food, and were fed. 

September 9, 1968. — ^A man was reported having been seen lying on the west 
side of the Detroit-Toledo, and Ironwood Railroad off Stadler Road. Troopers 
from Blissfleld State Police post picked up the man and returned him to the 
Schwynn camp, over his objections. The man was extremely dirty, apparently 
suffering from a bowel disorder. His name was Steve Thomas Lahetta, white, 
male, 5'7", 145 pounds, whose last address was given as 1417 W. Madison St., 
Chicago, Illinois. The crew leader, Wardell Williams, said that he would clean 
up Mr. Lahetta and feed him. 

At this time Lahetta told the troopers that he had told Mr. Williams that he was 
sick, Mr. Wiliams responded by telling him to leave the camp. When the troopers 
contacted Mr. Williams in the camp, he was advised to contact the County Health 
Department if Mr. Lahetta remained sick. 

September 10, 1968. — Michigan Migrant Ministry office reque.sted the Michigan 
Health Department officials to re-check the Charles Schwynn camp. By Septem- 
ber 11, this was accomplished by Jerry Doan who is responsible for the Lenawee 
County area from Saginaw. On the evening of the 10th, the Mennonite pastor. 
Rev. Virgil Oyer, of Adrian, called the Director of Michigan Migrant Ministry 
to ask guidance for one of the six persons who had left the Schwynn camp on 
the 8th of September. Edgar Cardinal Broussard, an Indian from Louisiana, was 
still in Adrian after the other flve of his group had left to return to Chicago. 
He was seeking food and a place to sleep, and indicated a willingness to talk to 
anyone who might like to hear his story about his relationship with Mr. Wardell 
Williams. 

September 11, 1968 — ^A meeting was called for the First Presbyterian Church 
in Adrian to review the story of Mr. Broussard. Those present were : Sigmund 
Wojtysiak, Chief of the Wage and Hour Division of the Bureau of Safety and 
Regulation, Michigan Department of Labor, Mrs. Elsie Thielander, Public Health 
Nurse, Lenawee County Department of Health, Mr. Carl Hammerstrom, Farm 
Labor Placement Services of the Michigan Employment Security Commission 
Office in Adrian, Mr. Jerry Doane of the Michigan Department of Health Office 
in Saginaw, Rev. Virgil Oyer, co-chairman of the Lenawee County Migrant 
Ministry Committee, Rev. William Winch, pastor of the church hosting the 
meeting. Mr. Broussard was questioned concerning his experience with Mr. 
Williams and his complaint concerning the wages he did not receive. He was 



36-513 0—71 15 



5198 

l^rmitted time to tell his story as he saw it from the time that he was picked 
up in Chicago until he left the camp on Stadler Road. Mr. Broussard said 
that a young iM)liceman in the 900 block of W. Madison Street in Chicago 
approached him with the remark, "I got just the thing for you." He was taken 
to the bus of AVardell Williams and climbed aboard witb the understanding that 
there would be adetpiate pay for as much work as he wanted to do. Thi-; was 
Saturday afternoon. Mr. Broussard said that the ixjliceman received $1.50 for 
each worker he recruited. He did not give the scturce for this information. Mr. 
Williams held the bus until it was filled. As soon as the bus pulled away from 
Chicago cases of wine were opened and distributwl among the workers. As far 
as Mr. Broussard knew the bus did not stop between Chicago and Blis.sfield, 
Michigan. When it did finally stop it was at the place of work and not at a 
migrant camp. They were put immediately to work. It was Sunday morning. 

They were to be paid lO?* for each hamix^r picked. Mr. Broussard said that 
he picked a total of 274 hami>ers during his week of work for Mr. Williams (a 
very low number). At l(y(^ per hami)er this is a total of $44.04 for the week. Mr. 
Broussard said that there were no tickets given to be used as a record for 
the number of hami)ers picked, the record was chalked on a blackboard each 
day and erased at the end of the day. At the end of the week Mr. Brou.'^sard 
exiiectetl to receive $44.00 from the crew leader and was told that he owed $5.00 
to the crew leader and would have to remain on to pay off that amount. Of 
the lOc* promised for the hami>er of tomatoes, the group was informed at the first 
paying time that 2^ would be held back until the crop was harvested. 

The workers were charged $2.00 i^er day for their room and $1.00 for each 
meal. Sometimes the meals were served while all the men were sleeping before 
daylight and not permitted to eat after they had dressed. There was 40^ charged 
for each package of tobacco supplied to the workers. $3.00 for each y^ fifth 
of wine, and there was a woman available for $7.00. No money changed hands 
in the.se transactions, it was kept as a record in the crew leaders book. Of 
the six workers who were with Mr. Broussard, from Chicago, only one, a man 
by the name of Gwinn from Wisconsin, received $8.00. 

Mr. Brou.ssard siK)ke of one man at the camp who had been kicked out of 
the barracks to sleep on the floor of the bam beeau.se he had the runs. 

In the sleeping rooms provided there were 4 or men in a room without 
blankets or pillows. Mattres.ses were moved from other beds to be used for 
covers and sometimes the men slept together to keep warm. 

Mr. Broussard was sustained in his stay in Adrian for nearly a week by the 
Lenawee County Department of Social Services. Intake worker, ]Miss Yvonne 
Whipple, served in a case work liaison with Mr. Broussard. Miss Whipple was 
able to talk with someone at the home of Mr. Broussard's son at the telephone 
number which he provided. She asked for money for his transportation back to 
Chicago, this was not received. Miss WHiipple said that most of the farm workers 
with whom she has to deal during the summer come from this particular crew. 
The story which Mr. Brous.sard gave, thougli far-fetched, was not unusual. The 
pay pattern witli this crew .seems to be normal. That is, workers arrive at the 
time of payment, but are told that they owe the crew leader money for services 
he has given them. Many si)oke also of being slapped across the back or neck 
and told to work faster. All spoke of being picked up in df)wntown Chicago by 
Warden Williams and brought to the Schwynn farm. Mr. Broussard also told 
Miss Whipple about a man who was being kept in the barn by ^Ir. Williams be- 
cause he was too dirty to be allowed in the housing provided at the camp. 

September 17, 1968. — Rev. Virgil Oyer was at the Mercury garage in Bli.ssfield 
where a drunken man was waiting for the Blissfleld police to pick him up. When 
he tried to verify his identity to the police, he could not find a Social Security 
Card which he said he had had when he last looked. The Blissfleld policeman 
who serviced the call told Mr. Oyer that it was not unusual to have this kind of 
difficulty with the crew under Mr. William.s' leadership. That Mr. Williams fre- 
quently came looking for his men in Blissfleld liecause he could not keep them 
at the camp. The man did not want to be returned to the Schwynn camp for fear 
of being beaten. 

September 17, 1968. — Wardell Williams called Mr. Carl Hammerstrom at the 



5199 

Michigan Employment Security Commission to ask for guidance concerning a 
worker he did not know what to do with. The worker was very sick at that point, 
Mr. Hamerstrom called the County Health Department. 

September 19, 1968. — County Health officials were again asked to check the 
camp. Advised Mr. Williams to pick up Lahetta and to give him proper care. Mr. 
Williams agreed to do this, but asked the police to call an ambulance for him. 
Because of the financial implications in such action, they reminded Mr. Williams 
of his responsibility. Mr. Williams agreed to bring Mr. Lahetta to the hospital 
as soon as it stopped raining. He wanted to bring the man in the back of a pick- 
up truck instead of his sedan. 

Mr. Lahetta was admitted to the Adrian Hospital and examined by Dr. 
Leonardo Baydon of Adrian. It was his opinion at that time that the condition 
of Mr. Lahetta was terminal. Subsequently the County coroner, Mr. Edward 
Braun, advised the Michigan State Police that the death was caused by amoebic 
dysentery and peritonitis. There was no evidence of foul play involved. It was 
reported by those who attended Mr. Lahetta in the hospital that he was so dirty 
that he appeared to be a negro man when admitted, but it became apparent that 
he was white after he had been bathed in oil a number of times. The state of his 
bodily deterioration was so advanced that there were maggots, or what appeared 
to be maggots, crawling out of his rectum. 

A brother of Mr. Lahetta was contacte<l in Ohio. When inquiry was made into 
funeral expenses it was discovered that there was no Social Security card in his 
possession. The brother from Ohio indicated that a short time before he had been 
carrying a Social Security card and was eligible for benefits. 

Mr. Carl Hammerstrom of the Michigan Employment Security Commission 
indicates that Wardell Williams is registered as a crew leader under the Crew 
Leader Registration Act of the Federal Government. Mr. Hammerstrom felt that 
the all-male crew and its confinement to a camp has value for a local community. 
FeeMng that prostitution is common among farm workers under any conditions 
because the workers want it, it is better that it be kept in the camp than that 
workers come seeking such services in Adrian. He also pointed out that the work- 
ers want liquor and wine and if it were not provided illegally in camp they would 
only come to a town drinking place to acquire it and this would require more 
police to care for the problem and more taxes. He agreed that the wages were low 
but this is necessary in order to provide the cheap food that we now have on our 
grocery shelves. 

News Articles that appeared in The Globe and Mail, Saturday, February 22, 
1966 "ADMITTED KILLER TOO VALUABLE' TO SERVE ORDINARY 
PRISON TERM" Immokalee, Fla. (AP)— Wardell Williams is an admitted killer 
too valuable to send to prison. 

Circuit Judge Harold Smith said 100 farm workers would be unable to earn a 
living if the farm labor contractor were taken out of circulation permanently. 

He sentenced Williams to 20 years' probation and ordered him to spend two 
months in Collier County Jail each year until 1988. He must report each July 1 
and spend the non-harvest months of July and August behind bars. 

Williams pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the shooting of his common-law 
wife, Josephine Crawford, 35, on Dec. 5. 1967. He said they argued and claimed 
the killing was accidental. 

"He's an employer of people," Judge Smith said yesterday. "When farmers 
need fruit-pickers or other workers, they deal through him. To put him away 
would be putting many iieople out of work." 

Defense lawyer Jerome Pratt said Williams' payroll probably was between 
$400,000 and $500,000 a year. He hauls his crew by bus and truck to the crops. 
Farmers pay Williams and he pays the pickers. 

Most of his work is in this Southwest Florida fringe of the Everglades farm 
area which calls itself the "watermelon capital of the world." Cucumbers, bell 
peppers, tomatoes and oranges also are important cash crops here. 

Mr. Pratt said he requested the unusual sentence : "In my opinion Wardell 
is more valuable to society with this type of sentence than he would be resting 
in State Prison with the taxpayers feeding him while these people have to find 
new jobs. 



5200 

"He's a good guy. For eight years he's kept them fed. He keeps them clothed. 
He keeps them working. He takes care of them." 

Judge Smith .said it wa.s William.s" fir.st felony conviction. "He'll serve 40 
month.s this way and. under our present parole laws, he'll probably do more 
time than if I'd given him the maximum of 20 years in prison," he said. 

I'articipants : 
Ray Barrett — Assistant Prosecuting Attorney. 
Sgt. Johnson — Michigan State Police, Paw Paw post. 
Sgt. Fo.ster — Michigan State Police, South Haven Post. 
Robert Kaukola — Michigan Dept. of Healtli. Region I. 

Norman Papsdorph — Michigan Dept. of Health, State Director, Sanitation. 
Dale Hough — Micliigan Employment Security Comm, St. Joseph oflSce. 
Richard Mock — r.S. Dept. of Labor, Farm Placement Service, Chicago office. 
Wayne Wismer — U.S. Dept. of Labor. Farm Placement Service, Cleveland office. 
Richard Stumi) — Sheriff, Van Buren County. 
David Moore — ^Michigan Migrant Ministry. 

Walter Winters — Salvation Army, 91 Hinkley St.. Benton Harbor. 
William Benallack — ^Michigan Migrant Ministry, State Director. 

Before entering the place of meeting at Galati's Restaurant, Major Walter 
Winters of the Salvation Army, spoke about a nunilver of men who run off from 
all-male crews to his agency for temporary shelter and food on their way back 
to Chicago. He said they had described to him most of what was written in the 
Warden Williams case study. He indicated a willingness to cooperate in any way 
with the law enforcement or other agencies in the county in gaining access to 
this problem. 

After the conversation began around the table inside it was apparent that in 
Van Buren County the all-male crew problems centered in two camps, both on 
the Duane Funk farm. One is operated by Vincent Drewry, and the other by 
Cotton Brewer. 

It was pointed out that one of the problems in prosecution following violence 
in a farm labor camp is the length of time it takes to move a ca.se through the 
criminal courts. Secretly the witnes.ses have disappeared and often the victim 
himself has left the county and the state. One case pending at the time of the 
conversation involved a man who is cut up badly and in the hospital. Sgt. Johnson 
indicated that it will be difficult to keep him around long enough to get the case 
into court and gain the use of his testimony. 

Dick Mock explained some of the difficulties in the enforcement of the Crew 
licader Registration Act. The Act only applies to those labor contractors who 
recruit 10 or more farm workers, move them across state lines for a fee. Since 
the implementation of the Act, there have been only 2 convictions, both of which 
resulted in $100 fines. 

It was suggested that one avenue of approach in Van Buren County would 
be through the cooperation of all of the agencies involved in .services to farm 
labor camps. Fir.st, there is a need for an awareness of the kinds of problems 
which are peculiar to the all-male labor camps, and secondly, an opportunity 
for sharing information. 

The U.S. Department of Labor informed the group that a new man has been 
established in Napoleon, Ohio to service the.se complaints. He is available for 
investigation in local situations of this sort. 



5201 

It was also suggested that a man be put into the system in Chicago or in 
Van Buren County to gather evidence. He should be a qualified farm worker 
and able to associate freely with the men in wino crews, and should be well 
trained in gathering evidence. 

Wayne Wismer pointed out that the Crew Registration Act required that the 
crew leader maintain a detailed record of all financial transactions within his 
crew and that each worker be given a detailed statement of deductions from 
his wages. 

Sgt. Johnston was asked to initiate an inquiry' through the Michigan State 
Police office in East Lansing to the Chicago police concerning the recruitment 
of farm laborers on West Madison Street by local policemen for the crew 
leaders who bring their buses to that area. 

Another suggestion was to raise these questions publicly to rouse public 
indignation against a farmer who would use this kind of labor. Some around 
the table felt that such ostracism would have little value since such persons 
frequently are already ostracized by their fai-mer neighbors. 

An aside which involved a review of a case now pending. In a camp of Cotton 
Brewer a man was stabbed on the 31st of May. He has told the police that he pays 
$17.50 a week for room and board to Mr. Brewer, that he was recruited from 
Chicago on the 14th of January. The sheriff felt rather firmly that the man was 
stabbed by Mr. Brewer, but feels that he will be unable to demonstrate this in 
court. 

SUMMARY 

1. All agencies in Van Buren County be aware of the peculiarities of the all- 
male farm labor camp and be willing to exchange information which they 
uncover. 

2. Put a worker into the all-male labor camp stream with the ability to get other 
evidence for a court case 

3. An inquiry be initiated by the Michigan State Police of police practices in 
Chicago and the recruitment of farm laborers for crew leaders on West Madison 
St. 

•4. Pressure be put on the farmer who hires this kind of crew through public 
opinion and official inquiries. 

5. It was requested that the Chicago office be notifiefl about all violations in 
Van Buren County whether they can be prosecuted or not. 

6. Dale Hough was requested to keep a list of verbal complaints which come 
through his office and to share them with others who might be able to develop a 
pattern by such sharing. 

7. It was recommended that information in Van Buren County be centralized 
and all other agencies be informed. Dale Hough was requested to fill this function. 

Inquiry was made concerning the absence of Social Security cards on some of 
those who have been involved in difficulties in all-male camps. It was pointed out 
that a possible use of such cards would be a new identity for someone. Another is 
a new reporting number for a crew in order to conceal the movement of the crew. 
Yet another suggestion was some form of Internal Revenue Service evasion. 

In one of the summaries Dale Hough said that it seems like every road leads 
us back to the river again. We all know what happens in such camps but how do 
you prove it? 



5202 



CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE 
PRESS RELEASE 



Contact* James Lorenz 
John Ladd 
California Rural Legal 

Assistance 
1212 Market Street 
San Francisco, Cali>fornia 



July 27, 197Q 



Telephone: (4151 863t?4911 



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 



The United States Department of Agriculture was accused 
today of delivering huge agricultural suBsi"dies to growers who 
regularly and flagrantly violate pure food laws, The charges are 
contained in a formal complaint filed today with the U.S.D.A, in 
Washington, D, C. by the Association of California Consumers and 
twelve farm workers, 

Accordinq to the complaint, 30 California growers who 
received agricultural subsidies of $7,100,000 in 1969 were in regular 
and flagrant violation of the California Pure Food Laws and the 
California Field Sanitation Laws, as well as the Federal Pure Food 
and Drug Act, One alleged violator received $4,370,657 in agricultural 
subsidies in 1969; another alleged violator, $1,788,052 in 1969. 

The complaint estimates that California growers who received 
over $25 million of agricultural subsidies in 1969 committed more than 
120,000 violations of health laws in that year. 



I 



5203 



The petitioners are represented by California Rural Legal 
Assistance. Coinnionting on the petition, CRLA attorney Jim Lorenz 
said: "We are flabcrgasted as to how the Federal government can so 
lucratively reward persons who are in violation of the law. It is 
an interesting commentary on the present campaign for law and order. 
The Department of Agriculture continues to pay agricultural subsidies 
to growers producing food in flagrant violation of local pure food 
laws . " 

The complaint demands that the U.S.DiA, end all subsidization 
of growers violating the health laws. It also demands that the Federal 
government discontinue purchases or distribution of food which has, or 
may have become adulterated by reason of being grown in unsanitary 
conditions . 

The Association of California Consumers entered the case 
in order to protect consumers throughout the country. Because the growers 
illegal failure to provide toilets frequently forces farm workers to 
urinate and defecate directly upon food crops, a potential danger to 
consumers is created, Sylvia Siegel, director of the Association of 
California Consumers, stated: "The government talks about law and 
order all the time, but they break the law themselves. Consumers have 
assumed that they are protected by the pure food laws. But now we find 
the government itself distributing adulterated foods to school children 
and giving huge subsidies to growers who send it into the super- 
markets." 



5204 



In addi' ion to being cited '< r fail.inq to protect the 
Amcric ir. consumer, the U.S.D.A, is itself accu « d in the complaint of 
violatinq two f cu oral laws, The Federal Pure Vond Act bars the U,S,D,A, 
from receiving or distributing adulterated feed. The Federal Service 
Contraf-ts Act of 1''65 requires the U.S.D.A, to i:-e cut off contracts 
with growers who are in violation of sanitation Jaws. 

"It's line we take a close look at tho Federal Agricultural 
Subsidy Program," L<5rcnz concluded. "Violation of the laws should 
not be rewarded by the Federal government." 



5205 



JAMES D. LORENZ, JR. 

JAMES SMITH 

CARLOS YMOSTROZA 

1212 Market Street 

San Francisco, California 94102 

Telephone: (415) 863-4911 

Attorneys for Petitioners 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
WASHINGTON, D" C. 



In re 



ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA 
CONSUMERS; PAT FLORES, DIONICIO 
VASQUEZ, MIGUEL CAMAS, LUPE AVENA, 
APOLINAS MARIN, PAUL MJ^RIN , GLORIA 
MARIN, CONNIE MJVRIN , MARLO MARIN, 
MANUEL MARIN, JUAN ESPINOZA, RAY 
F. LOPEZ, and All Farm Workers 
Similarly Situated, 

Petitioners . 



NO. 

PETITION FOR 
IMTIEDIATE ACTION TO 
CUT OFF AGRICULTURAL 
SUBSIDIES TO GROWERS 
IN VIOLATION OF THE 
LAW 



TO: The Honorable Clifford Hardin, Secretary, United 
States Department of Agriculture 



This petition is filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §4321, £t seq 
21 U.S.C. §§331, 342, 41 U.S.C. §351, et seq . , and California 
Health and Safety Code §5474, et seq . 

Petitioner Association of California Consumers is a 
private organization, duly organized under California law, and 
concerned with the protection of consumers. The remaining 
petitioners are farm workers, filing this action on behalf of 
themselves and all other farm workers similarly situated. 

Numerous growers receiving agricultural subsidies from 
the U. S. Department of Agriculture are in continuing and flagrant 
violation of Federal and state health laws banning the shipment 
of unclean and adulterated food in interstate commerce. Thus, 
through its agricultural subsidy program, the Federal government 
is allowing, and even encouraging, the growth and shipment of 
adulterated food. This constitutes a flagrant disregard for law 
and order, a disregard which is subsidized and even encouraged 



5206 

1 by the Federal government. In addition, the U. S. Department of 

2 Agriculture, in providing agricultural subsidies to various 

3 farmers, is acting as a joint venturer with those farmers, and/ 

4 consequently, is itself in the violation of Federal and state 

5 laws. 

6 Petitioners request the Secretary of the U. S. Department 

7 of Agriculture to take immediate steps to stop these practices, 
including : 

(a) the cut-off of all agricultural recipients now 
found to be in violation of Federal and state laws dealing with 
adulterated foods; and 

(b) the promulgation of regulations to insure that, in 
the future, no agricultural subsidies will be paid to growers in 
violation of such laws. 



8 
9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 



From May 22 -May 29, 1969, the J. G. Boswell Company, 
of Fresno County, California, employed some 15 farm workers at 
Corcoran, California, without providing properly constructed 
toilets, or toilet paper, or handwashing facilities — all in 
violation of the California Pure Food Act [California Health and 
Safety Code §26470] , and the California Crop Growing and Har- 
vesting Sanitation Act [Health and Safety Code §5474.20, et^ seq . ] . 

In 1969, J. G. Boswell Company received $4,370,657 in 
agricultural subsidies from the Federal government. 

These violations of the law by J . G. Boswell Company, a 
Federally-subsidized grower, were not isolated instances. Indeed, 
such violations have been flagrant and continual. Other violation 
of adulterated food provisions were observed from June 12 - June 
26, 1969 in fields located at Highway 41 and Nevada Avenue in 
Stratford, California. Petitioners are informed and believe and 
on such information and belief allege that similar violations by 

-2- 



5207 

J. G. Boswell Company continued through 1969 and 1970, up to 
the date of this petition. (For a more detailed description 
of these violations, see investigative reports, marked Exhibit A, 
which are attached hereto and made a part herein,) 

From June 20 - June 26, 1969, South Lake Farms, also of 
Fresno County, California, failed to provide toilets, handwashing 
and drinking facilities to farm workers employed in fields at 
Stratford, California. Petitioners are informed and believe and 
on such information and belief allege that similar violations by 
South Lake Farms occurred throughout 1969 and 1970, up to the dat^ 
of the filing of this petition. During 1969, South Lake Farms 
received from the Federal governjnent agricultural subsidies of 
$1,788,052. 

The above examples of violations of pure food laws by 
Federally-subsidized growers are merely symptomatic of wide 
spread failures prevalent in the California food industry. In 
1969, investigators for petitioners surveyed the fields of 30 
growers who were in continual violation of the California Health 
and Safety Code and who, as a group, received more than $7,100,00C 
in Federal agricultural subsidies. 

In 1969 alone, there were more than 635,750 violations of 
California sanitation laws by California growers, (The extent and 
nature of these violations is detailed in the Complaint to the 
State Department of Public Health, marked Exhibit B, attached 
hereto and made a part hereof.) Petitioners are informed and 
believe and on such information and belief allege that approxi- 
mately one-fifth of the growers responsible for these violations 
received agricultural subsidies from the Federal government 
totaling more than $25 million dollars in 1969. (Nationally, 
farmers received some $3.8 billion in agriculture subsidies 
in 1969, making this one of the largest benefit programs in the 
Federal budget.) 

-3- 



5208 

Petitioners are flabergasted as to how the Federal 
government can so lucratively reward persons in violation of 
the law. The continuing failure of the Department of Agriculture 
to stop agricultural subsidy payments to growers producing food 
in unsanitary conditions is an ironic footnote indeed to the 
present national campaign for law and order. This failure, which 
runs through the mammoth $3.8 billion agriculture subsidy program, 
air.ounts to a flagrant disregard of the public interest. If the 
Department of Agricu].ture were to require subsidy recipients to 
comply with the law, a powerful incentive would be created for 
food producers to provide sanitary conditions, and, petitioners 
submit, the violations of California's sanitation laws would be 
cut from 50 - 90% in a short period of time, 

II 

The provision of adequate sanitary facilities wherever 
foodstuffs are produced is not only a concern to agricultural 
workers, many of whom are now forced to work in unsanitary 
conditions. Clean and healthful foodstuffs are of primary 
importance to American consumers. California, the situs of more 
than 635,000 sanitation violations in 1969, is the largest 
agriculture producer of any state in the country, growing more 
than half of most of the country's fruits and vegetables. 

Grave health problems are raised by these violations. 
When growers do not provide toilet and handwashing facilities, 
many farm workers are forced to urinate and defecate in fields 
where fresh produce is grown. The farm workers have little 
choice in the matter. They often work for long hours surrounded 
by acres of food crops, far from any house, gas station, or any 
area where they can safely relieve themselves. When, as a 
result, they are forced to relieve themselves in irrigation 
ditches or in the fields themselves, human urine and excrement may 

-4- 



5209 

find its way on to food products by direct contact or through 
contact with the irrigation water, or by contact with the hands 
of the farm workers. 

Because clean food is a national, as well as a state 
concern, the Federal Pure Food and Drug Act prohibits the intro- 
duction into interstate coininerce of any food which is prepared, 
packed or held under unsanitary conditions. 21 U.S.C. §§342, 
331. The critical national interest protected by such restrictior 
has been aptly described by the California Legislature, which has 
passed similar provisions: 

"The legislature finds and declares that 
the people of the State of California have a 
primary interest in the sanitary conditions under 
which food crops are grown and harvested for 
human consumption and in the health and related 
sanitary conditions under which the workers are 
employed in the growing and harvesting of food 
crops." iCalifornia Health and Safety Code 
§5474.20.] 

Federal and state restrictions are not now being adequatel 
enforced by the Federal Department of Health, Education and Wel- 
fare, by the California State Department of Public Health, and by 
California county health authorities. The reasons for this lack 
of enforcement are clearly set forth in the Complaint to the 
California State Department of Public Health, marked Exhibit B 
and attached hereto: These agencies just do not have enough 
staff to enforce the relevant health regulations. Therefore, if 
the American consumer is to be protected from food being grown in 
unsanitary conditions, the U. S. Department of Agriculture must 
act. 

Ill 

The U.S.D.A. has a legal duty to act to insure that no 
agricultural subsidies will be paid to agricultural producers 
until adequate steps have been taken to insure that such producers 
are in compliance with health and safety laws, both at the Federal 
and state level. Moreover, in providing agricultural subsidies 

-5- 



5210 



I 



to growers who are in continual violation of health and safety 

laws, the U.S.D.A. is in violation of the law. 

By providing supplementary payments for some crops, such 

as sugar, corn and rice, the U.S.D.A. stands as the mortgagee 

of the grower's crops, as well as a guaranteed purchaser if prices 

fall below support prices. For those crops where the U.S.D.A. 

pays farmers not to produce on certain portions of land (and the 

farmers are able to take the Federal payments and undertake 

production elsewhere), the U.S.D.A' stands as the rentor without 

possession of the lands in question. In enforcing prices which 

are set on certain subsidized crops, the U.S.D.A. also serves as 

an enforcement agent. Given these various roles which the U.S.D.A 

plays, it is clear that where Federal subsidy programs are 

instituted, the U.S.D.A. is acting as a joint venturer with the 

farmer. As a joint venturer, intimately and continually involved 

in the production of agricultural foodstuffs, the U.S.D.A. is 

bound to comply with Federal and state sanitation requirements, 

or, at the very least, to insure that its co-joint venturer, the 

farmer, complies with such laws. The normal doctrines of 

vicarious liability should be even more applicable to the U.S.D.A 

since the U.S.D.A., as a governmental agency, carries a higher 

responsibility to fully comply with the law than does a private 

person. 41 C.F.R. §1-12.103 provides, for example, that all 

Federal agencies should: 

"Cooperate, and require contractors to cooperate, 
to the fullest extent possible, with Federal and 
state agencies responsible for enforcing labor 
requirements "to such matters as safety, health, 
and sanitation...." 

IV 

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 
§§4321, et seq . , also requires the U.S.d'.'a. to cease the subsi- 
dization and encouragement of growers responsible for unsanitary 

-6- 



5211 

conditions , 

Recognizing the right of each citizen to a healthful 
environment [41 U.S.C. §4331c] , the Act provides that the govern- 
ment should "promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate 
damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the 
health and welfare of man,.,." Violation of field sanitation law 
is clearly contrary to these policies because it directly endanger 
the most important element of the biosphere -- men themselves. 
Since field sanitation violations thus contravene environmental 
policies, the U.S.D.A, is required to interpret its policies and 
regulations so as to eliminate, to the fullest extent possible, 
such endangerment of health. 42 U.S.C. §4332 explicitly requires 
this: 

"The Congress authorizes and directs that, 
to the fullest extent possible: (1) the poli- 
cies, regulations, and public laws of the 
United States shall be interpreted and admini- 
stered in accordance with the policies set 
forth in this chapter," 

The U,S,D,A. is further bound by 42 U,S,C, §4333: 

"All agencies of the Federal government 
shall review present statutory authority, 
administrative regulations, and current poli- 
cies and procedures for the purpose of deter- 
mining whether there are any deficiencies 
or inconsistencies therein which prevent full 
compliance with the purposes and provisions 
of this chapter..,." 



In delivering mammoth subsidies to growers in violation of 

sanitation laws, the U.S.D.A, is also in violation of the Federal 

Pure Food and Drug Act. 21 U.S.c" §331 of the Act provides, in 

part: 

"The follov/ing acts and the causing 
thereof are prohibited: (a) the introduction 
of delivery for introduction into interstate 
commerce of any food... that is adulterated... 
(c) the receipt in interstate commerce of 
any food that is adulterated...." 

-7- 



5212 

And, 21 U.S.C. §342 provides, in part: 

"A food shall be deemed to be adulterated-.,, 
(a) (4) if it has been prepared, packed or 
held under unsanitary conditions whereby it 
may have become contaminated with filth, or 
whereby it may have been rendered injurious to 
health...." 

The granting of assistance to growers who violate sanitation laws 

is by itself a causing of the introduction of adulterated food 

into interstate commerce, and is, therefore a violation by 

U.S.D.A. of the above-cited provisions. These violations become 

even more dramatic when various types of Federal assistance to 

growers are examined. 

First, under several U.S.D.A. programs, crops are purchasej: 
outright from growers and distributed by the Federal government, 
notably to school children under the "School Lunch Program" and 
to the poor under the "Commodity Distribution Program," U.S.D.A. 
also accepts repayment of "commodity credit" through the direct 
transfer of food crops from the grower to the U.S.D.A. 's 
Commodity Credit Corporation, with similar means of disposition to 
children and to the poor. Both these U.S.D.A. programs are clear 
instances of a prohibited "receipt into interstate commerce" of 
adulterated food v/here the subsidized growers have failed to compl^ 
with field sanitation laws. 

Second of all, where U.S.D.A. gives credit under the price 
support program of the Commodity Credit Corporation, it is also in 
violation of the Federal Pure Food and Drug Act whenever the growers 
are in violation of field sanitation laws. The fatal "receipt into 
interstate commerce" arises from the mere granting of the commodity 
credit loan, since such a loan is essentially the granting to 
the grower of an option to sell his product to the United States 
at a predetermined price.— 



!_/ This option to sell arises because the loan granted is a non- 
recourse loan and the grov/er will naturally repay the loan with a 
crop whenever its market price falls below the amount of the loan, 

-8- 



5213 



VI 
By subsidizing growers in violation of sanitation laws, 

the U.S.d'.'a. is also in violation of the Service Contracts Act 

of 1965. Section 2 of that Act [41 U.S.C. §351] provides, in 

part: 

" (a) Every contract entered into by the United 
States... in excess of $2500... the principle pur- 
pose of which is to furnish services in the United 
States through the use of service employees, as 
defined herein, shall contain. ., (3) a provision 
that no part of the services covered by this 
chapter will be performed, . .under working condi- 
tions .. .which are unsanitary or hazardous or 
dangerous to the health and safety of service 
employees engaged to furnish the services." 

41 U.S.C. §357 (b) defines "service employee" as including: 

"Any person engaged... in unskilled, semi- 
skilled, or skilled manual labor occupations. , , 
and shall include such persons regardless of 
any contractual relationship that may be 
alleged to exist between the contractor or 
subcontractor and such person." 

Violation of the contractual provision required in §351 allows 
the United States to cancel the contract so violated and to dis- 
qualify the violating contractor from securing any other Federal 
contracts. 

The legislative history of, and the administrative 
provisions construing, the Service Contract Act of 1965 make it 
evident that many U. S.D| A. -grower contracts are in fact, "service 
contracts." See Senate Report No. 798 on the Service Contract 
Act of 1965, 1965 12] U. S, Code, Cong. Admin. News 3737 (89th 
Cong. 1st Sess. 1965). Indeed, the U. S.D .A. -grower contracts may 
be defined as "service contracts" even though the Federal govern- 
ment is said to be making a certain investment in capital and 
land in addition to labor. As long as the consideration bargained 
for by the government is a "service," rather than "goods," or "con 
struction," the amount of labor and non-labor costs in the pro- 
vision of services is irrelevant. See 29 C*F.R. §4. 131a. 
/// /// 

-9- 



1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 



5214 



In many of the agricultural subsidies extended by the 
Federal government to growers, the services bargained for by 
the U,S.D,A. are actions which help conserve and maintain the 
nation's valuable natural resources. Under the Agricultural 
Conservation Program, the grower agrees to perform work on his 
land to protect against wind and water erosion, to improve the 
productivity of the land, and to protect and improve the source, 
flow and use of water for agricultural purposes. Under the 
Production Adjustment Act, payments are made to growers who agree 
to provide the service of limiting acreage or production. In 
return, growers receive Federal payments. Under the Emergency 
Conservation Measures Program, growers in California contract 
with the U.S.D.A. to provide "emergency control measures to 
rehabilitate farm land damaged by the 1968-1969 winter floods," 
(Under this Program, contracts were let to Kern, Kings and Madera 
Counties — the situs of the sanitation violations uncovered by 
petitioners — in amounts exceeding $260,000 in 1969.) 

To petitioners' knowledge, the U.S.D.A. has supplied at 
least $97 million dollars worth of contracts requring California 
growers to provide services for the United States Government. 
However, to the best of petitioners' knowledge, none of these 
contracts contain the Fair Labor Standard provisions required 
by the Service Contracts Act of 1965, It would be a simple matter 
indeed for the U.S.D.A. to require all the subsidy-applicants to 
present evidence of compliance with sanitation laws before agri- 
cultural subsidies are paid to such applicants. Such measures 
are already taken by the U. S. Department of Labor and by many 
other Federal agencies, pursuant to the provisions of the Walsh- 
Healey Act, 41 U.S.C. §§35-45. 

WHEREFORE, petitioners pray for the following relief: 
1. That the U. S. Department of Agriculture cut off 
all agricultural subsidies to growers in the United States now 

-10- 



5215 

found to bo in violation of Federal and state food sanitation 
requirements; and to this end, tliat the U.S,D,A, immediately 
undertake investigations to determine whether present subsidy 
recipients are in compliance with said laws; and further, that the 
U.S.D.A. stand ready to receive, and act upon, any complaint of 
sanitation requirements involving subsidy recipients. 

2. That the U.S.D.aV require that before any more 
contracts for agricultural subsidies be entered into with growers, 
that the grower-applicants be required to provide evidence of 
compliance with Federal and state sanitation requirements, 
including a signed affidavit, under penalty of perjury, setting 
forth the existence of such full compliance. 

3i That the U.S.D.A, bring itself into compliance with 
the Service Contract Act of 19G5 by inserting labor protection 
clauses into all covered contracts with grov;ers. 

4. That the U.S.D.A. publicly announce adoption of the 
policies and provisions, described above, and communicate such 
policies and provisions to all interested Federal, state and local 
health authorities concerned with the enforcement of food 
sanitation, including the U. S, Department of Health, Education 
and V'Jelfare. 

Dated: July 24, 1970. 

Respectfully submitted, 

JAMES D. LORENZ, JR. 
JATIES SMITH 
CARLOS YNOSTROZA 



By /s/ James D. Lorenz,. Jr. 
James D. Lorenz, Jr. 

Attorneys for Petitioners 



-11- 



5216 

EXHIBIT A 



GROi'JERS RECEIVING AGRICULTURAL SUBSIDIES 
^-mo VIOIATE FIELD SANITATION LAWS 



West Lake Fanns Subsidies Receivec 

$697,360 C1969) 
$341,797 (19&8) 
$622,569 (1966) 

1 

Violations: 

Date: April 7 - 11, 1969, 

Number of victims: 13 

Violations: No toilet, no handwashing 
facilities, no drinking 
water. (I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approxoimate location: 22nd Ave. & Nevada Ave,, 

Stratford, California 

Farm Labor Contractor: Mel Mendez 

2 

Violations : 

Date: June 12 - June 26, 1969 

Number of victims; 3 

Violations: No toilet, no handwashing 

facilities, no drinking v/ater. 
(I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approximately location: Highway 41 & Nevada Ave., 

Stratford,' California 

Farm Labor Contractor: Martin Murillo. 



5217 

3 

Violations: 

Date: June 26, 1969. 

Number of victims: 6 

Violations: Workers fired for refusing to 
work overtime without pay. 
(Labor Code §1695[4]) 

Approximate location: Highway 41 & Nevada Ave., 

Stratford, California. 

Farm Labor Contractor: Martin Murillo. 



4 

Violations: 

Date: July 28, 1969. 

Number of victims: 17 

Violations: Toilet dirty, no toilet tissue, 
no handwashing facilities. 
(I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approximate location: Southeast section 24 & 

northeast section 25, 
Stratford, California. 

Farm Labor Contractor: Martin Murillo. 

5 

Violations : 

Date: July 28, 1969. 
Number of victims: 6 



5218 

violations: No toilets, no handwashing 
facilities. (I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approximate location: East side of section 36, 

Stratford, California. 

Farm Labor Contractor: Martin Murillo. 

6 

Violations : 

Date: July 29, 1969. 

Number of victims: 3 

Violations: No toilets, no handwashing 

facilities, no individual drinking 
cups (I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approximate location: Stratford, California. 

Farm Labor Contractor: Martin Murillo. 

South Lake Farms Subsidies Received 

$1,788,052 (1969) 
$1,177,320 (1968) 

1 

Violations: 

Date: June 20 - June 26, 1969. 

Number of victims: 6 

Violations: No toilet, no handwashing 
facilities, no drinking 
water. (I.W.cV 14-68) 

Approximate location: Stratford, California. 

Farm Labor Contractor: Martin Murillo. 



5219 

J. G. Boswell Co . Subsidies Received 

$4,370,657 (1969) 
$3,010,042 (1968) 
$2,807,633 (1966) 

1 

Violations: 

Date: July 18, 1969. 

Number of victims: 20 

Violations: No toilet, no handv;ashing 

facilities, no itemized wage 
statement. (I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approximate location: Stratford, California. 

Farm Labor Contractor: J. P. Martinez 

2 

Violations: 

Date: May 22 - May 29, 1969. 

Number of victims: 15 

Violations: No handwashing facilities, 

improperly constructed toilet, 
no toilet tissue. (I.W.C. 14-68) 

Approximate location: 10th Avenue, Corcoran, Calif. 

Farm Labor Contractor: J. P. Martinez. 



5220 

EXHIBIT B 



JArii:s D. i.or<i:ii'/, JR. 

DIAMi; DHI.KVETT 

DURTOM I'lifiTZ 

MICli/JX BIUJin-IAN 

JOHN' YdlLLKY 

ED KEIiRY 

CAP.LOS YMOSTKOZA : 

DAVID KI re; PATRICK 

1212 Kirkc'c Street 

San Froncisco, California 94102 

Telephone: (415) 863-4911 

Attorneys for Petitioners 



STATE BOARD OF PUBLIC HEALTH 
STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH 
SACRAMEKTO , CALIFORNIA 



In re 


ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA ) 




CONSUMERS, PAT FLORES, DIONICIO ) 




VASQUEZ,. MIGUEL CANAS , LUPE AVENA , ) 




APOLINAS lUARIN, PAUL MARIN, GLORIA ) 




■ 1-IARIN, CONNIE MARIN, MARLO MiARIN, ) 




MANUEL MARIN, JUAN ESPINOZA, r;,V F.) 




LOPEZ, and All Farm Workers Simi- ) 




laxly Situated, -- . J 




Petitioners. ] 



NO. 

REQUEST 
ACTION ' 
SAN I TAT : 
IN FOOD 
AGRICUL"] 



FOR IM 
PROV 
:CN FAC 
PRODUC 
'UPAL F 



MEDIA'.:! 

IDE 

ILITI},£ 

ING 

lELDS 



TO: The Honorable Louis Saylor, Director, State Department 
of Public Health, the State Board of Public Health, 
and The Health Officer of Each County Grov.'ing Food- 
stuffs in the State of California 

This petition is filed on behalf of California consumers 
and farm v;c-t-keis pursuant to Sections 102, 205, 208 and 26543 of 
the California Health and Safety Code and Section 11503 of the 
California Government Code. Petitioners are suffering daily from 
the consequences of ineffective enforcement of sanitation lav;s in 
food crop grooving and harvesting % Those petitioners v;ho arc con- 
sumers are endangered by adulterated produce. Those petitioners 
v;ho are farm workers are subject to contagious diseases and other 
health hazards as well as to humiliation and discomfort. Peti- 
tioners request the State Board of Public Health to schedule 
hearings v;itl\in the next 30 days at which. testL-iiony shall be take 
on the sanitation crisis, recom:i'.cndations for lav; enf orcc.iient re 
form considered, and steps taken to carry ovit tl)C Board's rer.pon 
bility to ctifor.":r? sanitation lav.T. for petitioners' protection. 



5221 



1 



far from any house, gas station or any area v;here crops are not 



26 • SOKE FAWIvroRKERS DEFECATE AMD URINATE IN FIELDS 

j VJIIERE FRESH PRODUCE IS GROWJ VJHEN EMPLOYERS DO 

31 NOT PROVIDE TOILET FACILITIES. 

4 I 1 Workers have no choice." They, work long hours surrounded 
SB by acres of celery, lettuce, tomatoes, carrots or artichokes, 
6 

growing. They cannot use the highv/ay. There is no time to 
v/alk to a distant place because they v/ork on a piece-rate and 
any time taken off is their ovm economic loss. If they use an 
irrigation ditch,, crops becom.e contaminated v/hen irrigated. Some 
have refused to relieve themselves in the fields, but they become 
ill trying to control themselves for an entire 8-12 hour v;ork 
day. Furthermore, employers have made it clear that the farm 
vrorkers need no toilets; they are expected to use the surrounding 
area. These disturbing facts v;ere gleaned from conversations 
with hundreds of farm laborers working in a variety of crops 
throughout California. The excerpts which follow are from 
their affidavits. 

On Wednesday, October 8, 19 69, Manuel Olivas and Henry 
Cantu v;atched a six-man crew pulling a carrot-picking machine 
through the fields of the Bob Sanders Carrot Company in Monterey 
County. The workers told Cantu and Olivas that they had been 
working since 6:30 a.m. without a toilet, drinking water or hand- 
washing facilities. The field was their restroom. The attached 
photograph (marked Exhibit 1) was made that morning. It shows 



7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 

30 

\/ Letter from Dennis Powell to Director, Department of 
31 Agriculture, et al . , October 24, 1969, verified by lUinuol 

I Olivas and Henry Cantu. 
32 



a pile of fresh human feces and smeared toilet paper which lay 
in the line of carrots waiting to be picked by the machine.— 
On March 11, 1970, in Santa Maria, California, Israel 
Torres passed a field v;here eighteen workers were cutting and 



5222 

loading fresh broccoli into trailers. The employer' was guilty 
of a misdemeanor in that he provided no toilet/ no drinking 
water and no handv;ashing water. A V7orker v/as photographed from 
the road as he walked a short distance av;ay from the crew and 
relieved hj.r_5elf on the broccoli. (See attached photographs, 
marked Exhibit 2.) He used a fev/ leaves as toilet paper and 
resumed work.-— . / 

On October 8, 1969, in the King City area, employees of " 
United Fruit vere loading lettuce in Nunes Brothers Trucks. A 
toilet was in the general area, but it v;as a full thirty minutes 
walk from v.'rie.re the crew was v/orking. One worker was observed 
urinating ori the lettuce.— 

A veteran farm v;orker, v;ith 26 years experience in 
cultivating end harvesting grapes, peaches, plums and nectarines, 
recently reported that he has seen innumerable farm workers use 
the fields to relieve themselves v;hen growers or contractors 

fail to furrvish toilets for the v;orkers to use. He, himself, has 

4/ 

been forced to defecate in the fields.— 

Employers are often insensitive to the danger to v/orker 
and the geneiral public caused by their failure to provide sani- 
tation facilities. When told that he was going to be reported 
to health oEficials for failing to provide workers with toilets 
and other facilities, Denny Hackett, foreman for S. R. Gerrard in 
the Santa Bajrbara area, shrugged, "Go ahead and turn in your 
report. I don't care. I know the people in the Health Depart- 
ment. The workers don't need the facilities- They can p and 

s in the fields."— , 



y 

Declaration of Israel Torres, March 12, 1970. 

- Dennis Po-^-ell letter, supra , p. 3. 

- Affidavit of Macio Alonzo, March 20, 1970. 

- Declaration of Israel Torres, March 13, 1970. 



-2- 



I 



I 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 



5223 

A nineLcen-year old girl was v/ofking Xor labor contrachor 
Jose H. Hernandez in Santa Maria. The employer provided no 
sanitation facilities at any time during the eight hour v;ork 
day. . She. said: "...rather than relieving myself in front of 
my fellov/ v/orkers, v;ho v/ere men and v/omen, and rather than con- 
taminate the sugar beet crop, I tried to control myself, but 
I became sick v;hen I could no longer control myself. I had to 
leave my job and go home."— 

A Kern County v;oman developed pains in her side and lov/er 
abdomen because she refused to relieve herself in the fields 
"without the privacy of some type of toilet facility." She 
went v;ith fellow vrorkers to request toilets and other facilities 

from the boss, John J. Kovacevich, v/ho responded by providing a 

7/ 

gallon of drinking v/ater for a fev; days.— 

A man v;orking in the same county reported how humiliated 
and uncomfortable he felt v;hen he had to use the fields of his 
employer, Vlilliam Mosesian Corporation, as a toilet for tvv^o 
months when no toilet was provided. The employer finally pro- 
vided a "toilet," but it was: ' - • 

"...ncthing more than four v/ooden v;alls placed 
over a hole which had been dug in the ground. 
This facility V3s very dirty and v;as never cleaned 
to my knowledge. No toilet paper was ever pro- 
vided- 

"...no handv/ashing facilities of any kind were 

provided for our use. As a result, v/e were 

unable to v/ash our hands af.ter performing 

bodily functions. " • • - 

"...drinking water was provided; however, the 
water was often unclean. It appeared that 
the can containing the water had not been 
cleaned out for some tinie as there was con- 
siderable sediment, dirt .and other materials 
at the bottom of the can."i-/ 



, (her surname is withheld to protect 



- Affidavit of Maria 

her from possible harm), August 11, 1969. 

— Affidavit of Maria R. Garcia, January 31, 1969, 
£/ Affidavit of Samuel Hanriqucz, February, 1969. 

-3-. • 



5224 

A Santa Mai:ia worker v/as employed cuLLing broccoli. His 
employer also violated the lav/ and provided no sanitation i'acili- 
tics for his v/orkers. When the farm worker developed an infect ioi 

on his buttocks, he v;as informed by his doctor that the infection 

9/ 

had resulted from using broccoli leaves as toilet paper.— 

II 

THE FIELD SANITATIOM LAWS ARE ESTABLISHED TO 
PROTECT FARiM WORKERS AND CONSUMERS. 

Under California lav;, every producer of agricultural 
produce who hires farm V70rkers must supply the v/orkers v/ith 
toilet facilities which are sanitary and accessible, with soap, 
water, and tov/els for handv/ashing, and drinking facilities 
designed to protect against the transfer of comm.unicable diseases. 
These sanitation requirements are set forth in the California 
Health and Safety Code, the Labor Code, in regulations promulga- 
ted by the Industrial Welfare Commission relating to the pro- 
tection of v/'omen and children, and in various other administra- 
.tive regulations prepared by the State Department of Public 
Health and the Labor Commissioner. — ^^ ■ • 

The purpose of the requirements is clear: not only are 

they supposed to protect the health of farm workers and to provide 

them with barely decent working conditions, they are also to pro 

tect the consumer from purchasing foodstuffs contaminated with 

human excretia and filth. As was noted at a meeting of State 

officials called by the Department of Public Health in 1959: 

"1) Adulteration or contamination of the..'. 
[crops] itself occurs by direct deposit of 
urine or feces or handling with contaminated 
hands or gloves. . ' 



9/ 

— Single page declaration of Israel Torres, March 13, 1970 

—^ Sec, e.g.. Health and Safety Code, §5474.20, et sec^. , §26450, 
ct- spii. , §282C0, et sc^q. , Labor Code §1171, et scc[. , 17 Calif. 
Admin. Code §8000, ct sea., 8 CAC SllllO, ct scq . 

■-4- . . 



5225 

"2} Drinking water is endangered by urine 
/ and dcrfecation in the irrigation ditches. The 
worker and other segments of the rural public 
are eviposed to this risk. 

"31 Occupational risk to the v/orkers thera- 
selves results from drinking contaminated 
v/ater and from hand to mouth transmission of 
intestinal organisms. 

"4} tTorldv/ide e>:pericnce has shov;n that the 
applieation of human feces to land in the 
agric\iltural food operation facilitates dis- 
semination of infection to agriculturists 
themselves and to their families and to the 
gener£il public by poor hygiene and poor food 
handling practices. ".Li/ 

And as v/as reiterated by California's Chief of Environmental 

Sanitation in. November, 1959: 

"Aside from the sociological factors, v/hich may 
prove in the long run to be very far-reaching, 
these conditions Ilack of field sanitation faci- 
lities] create three public health problems. 

"The first is the risk of. disease to the workers 
themselves. Studies made by our Department in 
migrant worker camps in the San Joaquin Valley 
in 1950-1952 indicated that rates of infection 
in the families of migrant workers with intestinal 
diseases were closely related to availability 
of v;afcer for personal hygiene. Where hands are 
not weshed after visiting the toilet, infection 
spreads through a family by direct contact 
and b2' means of handling food. That this same 
principal holds in the harvesting fields is indi- 
cated iiy a relatively high incidence of illness 
and absenteeism due to diarrheal disturbances 
among field crop vjorkers. 

"The second hazard is the risk to the entire 
population in a comjT\unity where human excretia 
is deposited on the ground in proximity to ■ 
places of residence, particularly in situations 
where flies are abundant. 

. "The t±iird public health problem looms largest 
of all in the eyes of the public and this is the 
threat of contamination of food with human excre- 
tia. The degree of risk of transmission of disease 
to a consumer of food by this means is difficult 
to establish by scientific means, although it 
is certain that some risk exists. But the over- 
whelming consideration is the repugnance of the 
idea of filth on food and the insistence of the 
American public on clean food whenever the issue 



■ — Minutes of Food Crop Harvesting Sanitation Meeting, 
Berkeley, California, June 16, 1959. 

-5- 



5226 

1 I IS raised . — 

25 The principles of protection announced by the Department 

of Public Health have been approved by the California Lecjis- 

• 1 
lature and nadc part of California lav;. In order to protect 

1 ■ • 

consamcrs of foodstuffs, the California Pure Food 7vct [Health 



and Safety Code §26470(4)], passed in 1939, says that food is 

7U "deemed to be adulterated. .. [i] f it has been produced, prepared, 

8 1 packed or held under unsanitary conditions v;hereby it may have/ 

9 8 become contaminated v;ith filth, or v;hereby it may have been 

10! rendered diseased, unwholesome or injurious to health...." 

11 I Section 2645S of the sazse Act provides that the term "contaminatec 

12 b vrith filth"' applies "to any food not securely protected from 
13 1 dust, dirt, and as far as may be necessary by all reasonable 

14 j Cleans, from all foreign or injurious contaminations," As a furthcj-r 

15 B protection, a separate act, the Food Crop Grov;ing and Harvesting 
161" Sanitation Act, passed in 1965 [Health and Safety Code §5474.20, 
178 et^ seq .] states: . . 

18 5 "The Legislature finds and declares that the 

I people of the State of California have a 
19 B primary interest in the sanitary conditions 

I under v/hich food crops are grov/n and harvested 
208 for human consumption and in the health and 

I related sanitary conditions under which the 
21 j workers are employed in the growing and har- 

I vesting of food crops." [Health and Safety 
Code §5474.20.] 



Not only grov/ers, but also California's food retailers, 
wholesalers and canners must -comply v;ith the State's sanitation 
laws, since, when selling foods, they are giving the consumer 



261 an implied warranty that the food is free from any contamination 



and filth. To the extent that they sell food which is unclean 
or v/hich was picked under unsanitary conditions, they are in 
violation of the California Pure Food Act, even though they had 



12/ 

— ' Frank Stead, "Sanitation in tlie Harvesting of Field Crops," 

An Address Presented at the Anr.ual Convention of the California 

Farm Bureau Federation (Vegetable Department), Statlcr-I!il ton 

I Hotel, I.os Angeles, California, November 9, 1959. 



-6- 



I 



5227 

no knov/lcdcjc that the grov/cr who produced the food had failed to 

comply v/ith field sanitation requirements. Section 26'170 of the 

Act provides, in part: 

"A food shall be deemed to be adulterated: 

(1) If it bears or contains any poisonous 
or dclet.erious substance v/hich m^y render 
it injurious to health. .. or .. . 

(4) If it has been produced, prepared , 
packed or hold under unsanitary conditions 
whereby it may have becopie contaminated v/ith 
filth, or v/hereby it may have been rendered 
dis eased, unv/holesorae or injurious to 
health...." (Eraphasis added.) 

And Section 26510 provides: 

"The manufacture, production, preparation, 
compounding, packing, selling, offering for 
"sale or keeping for sale. ..any article of 
food v;hich is adulterated ... is prohibited." 

Significantly, a shov/ing does not have to be made that the food 
being marketed -is actually, contaminated. Under Section 26470, a 
complaining party must only allege that the food was picked in 
unsanitary conditions which "may" have led to its contamination. 
As the California Attorney General has opined, the protection must 
be broad if the lav/ is to be "an effective instrument." 23 Ops. 
Cal.Atty.Gen. 277, 280 (1954). In determining whether a food 
may pose a danger, it is much easier to look for toilets in a 
grov/er' s' field than it is to run a lengthy and costly laboratory 
test on his produce. A field check is also more effective, since 
it examines the source of the problem — contamination in the 
field . — rather than its end result -- contamination of the food- 
stuff. By the time produce reaches a supermarket, it raay be im- 
possible to maintain adequate surveillance, let alone control. 
As. the Attorney General notes, the provisions of Section 26470(4) 
may be "the only effective means of regulation provided." So, 
for example, if a raw fruit 

"is v.'holesomo but is being dried under 
unsanitary conditions. ..[ t] he fruit: would be 
adulterated within the provisions 

-7- 



5228 



of Section 2G'170('l). The situation may be 
that of a nearby privy, farm laborer.^ v/alking 
to and fro by the fruit, and flies in abundance. 
It is in the public interest that sucli condi- 
3| tions may be abated." (Supra, pp. 280-281.) 



Canncrs, wholesalers and food retailers are held to be under 

a duty of "ascertaining at... [their] peril" v/hether an article 

1 
of food kept for sale conforms to the requirements of the Pure 

Food Act. People v. Schwartz , 28 Cal.App.2d Supp. 775, 70 P. 2d 

1017 (1937) . For this reason, the standard purchase contract 

prepared by the Canners League of California makes provision for 

the grov/er to certify whether or not his crop is "adulterated" 

IM v/ithin the meaning of any law or governmental regulation. — 

*2 I Aside from protecting the consumer, the California Pure 

*3| Food Act and the Food Crop Grov/ing and Harvesting Sanitation Act 

^^ j make good business sense for th'e State's agricultural industry 

15 I which receives 'more than $2,644 billion from crop marketing and 

1" " is, year in and out, the nation's number one farm state. — 



17 

18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 



In providing a means of quality control on foodstuffs, 
the pure food and field sanitation lav.'s are intended to protect 
the competitive position of California agriculture in the 
nation's higMy competitive foodstuff markets. 

Without sanitation regulations, California foodstuffs 
might well bring a lower price on the nation's markets, and v;ould 
certainly suffer stiffer competition from other states. 

As foodstuffs are increasingly packaged in the fields 
where they are picked -- and this is a definite trend in Califor- 
nia, with the introduction of highly sophisticated agricultural 
machinery — the maintenance of field sanitation becomes more 
important. Nov;, more than ever before, food will be delivered to 



— ^'^ See, e.g., "Asparagus Contract, Form Prepared by Canncrs 
Ir;agu2 of California with Revisions to January 10, 1968," Clause H 



32 — California State Department of Agriculture, Califo rnia 
Agricultur e, 1968, p. 4. 



-0- 



5229 

the consumer in the condition that it is picked in the field. 

Producing 93.6% of the nation's artichokes, 84.8% of its 

broccoli, and 58.6^ of its celery — to name just three crops, 

California agriculture can v;cll be called the kitchen of the 

country — and like a kitchen of a coramercial restaurant, it is 

I 
subject to similar stringent health regulations. 

/ 
California agriculture must strictly comply with these 

sanitation requirements if the Araerican consumer is to be 

protected. 

Ill 

SANITATION LAWS ARE FREQUENTLY VIOLATED. 

Despite the stringent and comprehensive sanitation 
requirements, sanitary conditions are a fiction, not a reality, 
in many parts of this State, the fruit and vegetable bowl for 
the country. In 1968, three county health departments reported 
3574 violations of sanitation laws, while admitting that, being 
greatly understaffed, they were able to survey only a small 
portion of the fields in their counties. — 

In 1969, eleven health departments reported 14,898 viola- 
tions or defects, including 2649 toilet violations, even though 
all of these counties were able to devote only a total of 18.69 
man-years to inspecting field sanitation, labor camps, and 
other farm v/orker housing, or an average of 1.7 man-years per 
county. — Since Warren Holm, the sanitation specialist for the 
Farm v;orker Health Project, estimates that these eleven depart- 
ments were able to investigate from 10% to 505 of the fields in 



— ^ California Senate Couwiittee on Public Health and Safety, 
Survey on Enforcement of Field Sanitation Laws and Regulations, 
April, 19 69 (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "State 
Senate Sanitation Report"), Table 1. 

— ^ Farm V.'orkcr Health Environmental Health Program, 19 69 R eport, 
(hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "Farm Worlccr Health 
Report") , pp. 81-82. 

-9- 

36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 17 



5230 

their counties, their reports of violation:^ arc likely to 
represent only one-tenth to one-half of the acLual number of 
violations occurring in their, counties in 1969. Thus, if all 
of the fields in their counties v/erc surveyed, approximately 
5,298' to 26,490 toilet violatioiis would have been noted in the 



eleven counties. Since 14 of California's 22 largest agri- 
cultural counties did not make any reports about field sanitation 
8 1 to say nothing of thirty-three California counties which did not 
9 1 report, the above estiniate of toilet violations is less than 
10 1 half, and is more likely a third, of the actual number of sani- 
tation violations occurring in the State's agricultural areas in 
1969. Therefore, . if the 1969 statistics of the Farm VJorker 
Health Service are used as a basis for determination, we can 
conclude that there were at least 10,596 and probably more than 
15,894 toilet violations in the State in 1969. 

The toilet figures are only partly representative of the 
17 1 sanitation problem, of course. The 1969 Farm Worker Health 
18 j Service statistics made no determination of how many employers 
failed to supply handv.^ashing facilities and hygenic drinking 
cups to their workers. The 1968 State Senate Sanitation Report 



21 I indicated that for most of the counties making full reports of 



sanitation violations, handwashing and drinking cup violations 
ran 1-1/2 to 4 times as high as toilet violations.-^ Even if 



the latter kinds of violations v;ere only twice as much, they 
would. still have occurred at least 21,192 tLmes in 1969, based 
26 1 on the minimum number of toilet violations committed in 1969. 

27 I Thus, when the estimate of handwashing and drinking cup viola- 

28 tions is added to the estimate 6f toilet violations, v/c can con- 

29 elude that on at least 31,788 different occasions, California 

30 growers and labor contractors failed to comply with sanitation 

31 laws. 

32 I — / State Senate Sanitation Report, Table 1. 

-10- 



5231 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 



/ These figures do noL come close to indicating the total 
number of violations v;hich occurred in California. For every 
failure to provide a toilet or clean drinking cup, a number of 
v/orkers arc involved and affected. Assuming an average farm 
labor crev/ size of ten v;orkers (v/hich is a conservative estimate) , 
ten violations should be recorded for each failure to co.-nply v/ith 
the lav/, lloreover, since a different violation occurs for each 
day that the grov/er fails to comply v'/ith the lav;, the duration of 
the lack of compliance must alno be considered if a reasonably 
accurate estimate of violations is to be made. Assuming that the 

average time of non-compliance is tv;o days, based upon estimates t 

18/ 

sanitarians; — the number of failures to comply should also be 

multiplied by tv;o. So, multiplying the approximate instances of 
failure to co3ply in 1969 times. _,10 (the average number of persons 
affected) , times 2 (the average duration of the failure to com- 
ply) , we can conclude that in 1969 there vv-ere approximately 

635,750 violations of the sanitation lav;s in California, the , 

■ • I 
primary food producing State in the country. 

Even these figures are underestimated. C- F. Bryson, 

Program Supervisor for the Bureau o€ Food and Drug Inspections, 

State Department of Public Health, indicated that sometim.es county 

sanitarians do not enter fields to make a close inspection of 

sanitary facilities; they only observe the field from the road 

to determine whether a portable tqilet has been placed there. 

Thus, they are in no position to determine v/hether the workers 

are provided with toilet paper, whether the toilet is overflowing 

or situated directly over crops v;hich will be harvested, or 

whether farm. v:orkers are defecating in packing crates; nor do 

they knov/ whether the workers are provided with soap and towels 

and clean drinking cups. V^hat the sanitarians don't see, they 



18/ 

— This estimate was based upon sanitarians' ansv/ers to 

question 12 contained in the State Senate Sanitation Report, 
p. 19. Fstin-.ates ranged from 1-90 davs. • . 



-11- 



5232 

can't report. 

These figures should appear outlandish only to a person 
unCainiliar with California farm labor problems. 

1 Foj;. example: In a three-month period during the fall and 
winter of 1967 and 1968, investigators connected v;ith California 
Rural Legal Assistance made a survey of field sanitation 
conditions in Sutter and Yuba Counties, v/here plums, pears and 
apples are grov/n. Out of some 240 grov/ers surveyed, 184 grov;ers 

and labor contractors failed to comply v/ith the lav/ on 898 

19/ 

instances. — ^^ A minimum of 4,500 farm v;orkers v/ere affected, the 

total of separate legal violations v/ould number more than 

2,000,000, Reports, such as the following, v;ere typical: 

"Angel Castillo. Labor Contractor. October 
1967. 50 workers. Picking tomatoes. Drink 
from v;ater can. Toilets-: none. Handwashing: 
none." ^ ' • 

"Tom Frye - Grov;er. Grower, May & June, 
1967. 35 v;orkers. Hoe sugar beets. One 
cup for everyone, V7ater not clean. Toilets 
not private. Flies in toilet. Toilets 
stunk. Took about 35 minutes to get there. 
Handvrashing : none." 

"Spoto Nursery- Grov/er . May-Dec, 1967 . 4 
workers. Nursery work. Pour [drinking] v;ater 
into iid - no cup. Vlater -not clean. Kater 
not cold. Toilet dirty. No toilet paper. 
Black widow spiders. Handwashing: none," 

In the spring of 1968, in Monterey County, CRLA investi- 
gators received reports of 1,869 violations from 107 farm 
workers. Monterey County is the country's primary producer of 
strawberries and artichokes and is one cf the country's largest 
producers of lettuce. — 

In the fall of 1968, in Kern and Southern Tulare 
Counties, where a large percentage of the State's table grapes 



19/ 

— California Rural Legal Assistance, Report of Yuba- • 

Sutter Sanitation Investigation, February, 1968, 

20/ 

— Petition for Writ of Mandate, Munoz v. State Department of 

Employment , Sacramento Superior Court, Civil No. 191631. 

-12- 



5233 



are grovm, 61 instances of multiple violations v/ere reported to 

21/ 

California Rural Legal Assistance investigators. — Many of the 

delinquent growers reported continued to violate the lav; in 

1969: - • 

"...In grape fields in Tulare County, north ;• 

of Avenue 24 betv/een Highv;ay 99 and Road 144, 
apparently ovmed by Vignolo Farms, on February 
4, at 10 a.m,, and again at 2:45 p.m., there 
were 30 men and v/omen engaged in pruning grape- 
vines with no toilets or handwashing facilities. 

"...In the January &th letter, reference was 
made to apparently illegal conditions in a 
grape "field in Tulare County, east of Road 168 
betv/een Avenue 48 and Avenue 52, and apparently 
owned by Lamanuzzi & Pantaleo. Conditions ap- 
peared to be very much the same on February 
4; at 11:30 a.m., and again at 3:10 p.m., there 
were about' 60 men engaged in pruning grapevines 
with no toilets or handwashing facilities 
visible. 

"...In nearby fields als'o apparently owned by 
Lamanuzzi & Pantaleo, to the northwest of the 
intersection of Avenue 48 and Road 176, condi- 
tions were again much the same on February 11; 
at IrlO p.m., and again at 3:25 p.m., a crew of 
about 30 men was observed pruning grapevines with 
no toilets or handwashing facilities available." 

Citing at least tv/elve other instances where law violations were 

continuing over a three-month period, the McFarland report _ 



concluded: 



"It should be obvious that a mere warning to 
an employer concerning violations, follov;ed by 
what amounts to a scheduled reinspection on the 
following day, will produce obedience to law on 
that day, or at most, for" a couple of days there- 
after. Witness the failure of the warning-giving 
program of the Division of -Labor Law Enforcement 
to have any substantial lasting effect. If an 
employer can corrxait law violations v;ith nothing 
more to fear than a 'warning, * if and when an 
enforcement agent drops by, and if obedience to 
law for a few days after that 'warning' will 
satisfy the enforcement agency, then California 
agricultural employers can continue to commit 
crine in the fields with impunity. "r^/ 



— ' Letter from Paul Driscoll, Direct Attorney, California 
Rural Legal Assistance, McFarland office, to Director, Department 
of Industrial Relations, et al., February 25, 1969. 



2 2/ 



Driscoll letter, supra , p. 12. 

-13- 



5234 

1 , As a result of CKLA investigations, publicity, lav/suits, 

2 pressures by the United Farmv/orkcrs Organizing Conmiittcc, and 

3 accelerated efforts by public agencies, sanitary facilities v/crc 

4 introduced in a number of California counties in the spring of 

5 1969. In the June issue of The California Farmer, the California 

6 Farm Bureau published a five-page supplement of field sanitation 

7 regulations and a list of all the State's portable toilet sellers 

8 and lessors, along v/ith the v/arning that: " "...Iljt behooyes us' 

9 as farmers to keep our skirts so clean that we are above re- 

10 proach. Ke must work to see that ,, .Calif ornia Rural Legal 

11 Assistance, Inc., can find no instance in which we are not in 

12 complets: compliance with every one of the lav/s and regulations 

13 pertaining to farm workers." Portable toilet lessors reported 

14 a two- fold increase in their business. 

15 Despite such progress, and claims by some health officers 

16 that the problem was "solved," sanitation violations continued 

17 at a large enough rate in the summer and fall of 1969 to merit 

18 serious concern. Instead of an 80% to 90% violation rate — as 

19 was the case in 1967 and 1968 -- approximately 50% to 70% of all 

20 grov7ers wer^ found to be out of compliance in the 1969 harvest. 

21 In 65 inspections of fields in San Benito and Santa 

22 Clara Counties, where compliance was higher than in many other 

23 parts of the State, CRLA investigators nonetheless found, from 

24 April 1, 1969 to August 10, 1969,, 30 cases in which toilets were 

25 not provided; 34 where toilets were not readily accessible; 54 

26 where there was no toilet paper; 26 where there as an inadequate 

■ 

27 number of toilet facilities; 78 where there was no immediate 

28 access to handwashing facilities and/or no soap; 34 where no 

■ 

29 drinking water was provided; 57 v;here no individual drinking 

30 cups were provided; and 52 where drinking fountains were dirty 

31 I or inadequate. In two cases, the toilet facility was found to 

32 I /// • /// 

-14- 



5235 

-23/ 

be draining izito the field. — The Santa Clara Health Dcpartic.ent, 

surveying field sanitation from June 18 to September 15, 1969/ 
reported 42 "food crop growing and harvesting locations" v/hich 
did not provide any toilet, and 86 v/hich v/ere poorly constructed, 

had unsatisfactory interiors, or did not provide toilet paper 

24/ 

or handwashing facilities. — ^^ Santa Clara County is a major 

producer of pcrunes, apricots and garlic. 

In SarLt:a Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, v;hich 

produce peas» "celery, lettuce, beans and berries, investigations 

25/ 

conducted by CRLA from June 15 to July 15, 1969, revealed: — ' 



TOTAL CHECKS SiADE 



TOILET FACILIS^IES 

No Toilets Present 29' 3 ■ 1 . 33 

Present, brrt Inadequate ■ ' 
(b throug^Ji f on our 

complairt't form) 3 1 3 .7 

Toilets Satisfactory 2 3 5 10 



LETTUCE 


CELERY 


STRAW- 
BERRIES 


TOTAL 


35 


6 


9 


50 



NO HANDWASHIIS3 ... 

FACILITIES 35 6 . ' 9 50 

DRINKING WATE3 

Water Not Provided 
Provided, Enit No 
Individual Cups 
Water Satisfactory 

Significantly* no handwashing facilities were observed in any of 
fifty investigations. In addition, in ten instances, the investi 
gators found lettuce being packed in fields where there were no 
toilet facilities. Brand names observed on the lettuce boxes wer^ 
"Bonita" and "Big D." In one case, workers were made to park 





■-. - ■ 






31 


3 


4 


38 


3 


. 1 


5 


9 


1 


2 





3 



23/ 

— ^^ Califorala Rural Legal Assistance, Results of 65 Inspections 

of Fields, in San Benito and Santa Clara Counties, April 1, 
1969 - August: 10, 1969. 

24/ 

— ^^ Santa Cliira County Health Department Memorandum Regarding the 

1969 Survey cf Food Crop Growing and Harvesting, October 31, 1969 

25/ 

— ^^ Summary of Field Sanitation Investigation - Santa Maria. 



-15- 



5236 

their cars in the field, directly over the lettuce. In another 
field, two v/omen workers asked their foreman v/hy there were no 

toilet facilities provided, and he told them simply to relieve 

1 26/ 

themselves in the field. — ^^ Santa Maria grov/ers sell to packers 

■ [ ' • . 

who in turn sell the produce to Safeway, Kroger, and V/ynn-Dixie 

for distribution in Los Angeles, the Ear.tern United States and 

the South. •' • . ^ 

From August 22 to September 22, 1969, 358 sanitation 
violations were found by CRJLA investigators in Madera -and 
Fresno Counties, the raisin capitol of the world. Out of 79 
complaints filed with local health authorities, 64 grov/ers and 
labor contractors- failed to provide any toilet v/hatsoever .— ' 

In September, 1969, field investigation v/ere again made 
by CRLA personnel in Monterey. . Despite a field sanitation pro- 
gram described by State officials as the "most active" of any 

county in the State, 198 sanitation violations v;ere found at 

2 8/ 

locations employing 34 separate crev;s. — One location had an 

insufficient number of toilets for the number of v;orkers in the 
field; ten crews had no toilet at all; five crews had a toilet 
which was mo^^'e than five minutes from the place of v;ork; nine 
crews had a toilet which was unsanitary to the point of being 
unusable; thirteen crews had no toilet paper; ten crews had 
no water; fifteen crews had no cups or drinking fountain; 
twenty-six crews had no handwashing facilities whatsoever; and 
fourteen crews had no first-aid kits. 

Additional investigations were undertaken in Santa 
Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties from October 24 to 



26/ 

— ^^ Affidavit of Maria (her surname is withheld to 

protect her from possible harm) ,- August 11, 1969. 

27/ 

— California Rural Legal Assistance, Madera office, Statisti- 
cal Report on Field Conditions in 'Madera and Fresno Counties 
Covering August 22 to September 22, 1969. 

28/ 

— Letter from Dennis Powell, supra . 

-16-' 



5237 

M November 25, 1969. Out of 66 fields surveyed by CRLA investiga- 

2 1 tors, 40 failed to provide any toilet facilities; 44 supplied no 

•an 29/ 

^1 handwashing facilitxes, and 39 had no drinking v/ater.- — Fifty- 
one percent of the growers investigated failed to comply with 

1 ■ - • . 

any of the £ield sanitation requirements. The report concluded: 



"The data shows that there is no large grower 
who is in full compliance with the law. On the 
othex hand, there is no large grov;er v;ho never 
complies v;ith the law. The smaller grower 
geneirally either complies in full or never ' 

■ bothers . - 

"IiiJcewise our data shows no packing house that 

deals only with lav; abiding grov/ers. Packers 

ranged from 20 to 40 percent compliance. Thus 

we have no reason to single out any packing 

house as a 'clean' one, and' can conclude that 

there is substantial probability that any lot 

of produce purchased through any packing house 

has been picked without the necessary sanitary 

facilities." ' • ' 

Thus, the violation of field sanitation laws continues 

^throughout -fclie State — not at the astronomically high rate of 

1967 and 1968, but at a rate substantial enough to merit serious 

concern. 



.IV - ■ 

PRESENT LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNIQUES HAVE 
NOT BEEN EFFECTIVE. 



22 ff . A. Kot Enough Money Is Being Provided by County Boards 
of Supervisors. 



TSie first statement heard from local health department 
officials is, "We don't have the man-power to enforce the Food 
Crop Growing- and Harvesting Sanitation Act. The Legislature has 
given us the job of enforcing field sanitation laws, but it has 
given us no money." The sanitarians might add that county boards 
of supervisors also refuse to appropriate money for field sanita- 
tion enforcement. 



29/ 

— ' California Rural Legal Assistance, Santa Maria office, 

32 11 Field Sanitation Survey, December 5, 1969. 



• -17- 



5238 

The 1968 State Senate Sanitation Report indicated that 
in 1967-1968, only four counties in the State included specific 
budgetary requests for field sanitation enforcement. Six of the 
eight largest agricultural counties in the State budgeted no 
money expressly for field sanitation. In most of the counties 
in the State, the time spent on enforcement was inf initesimally 
small. To list just a fev/: Butte County expended .01 man-years 
in 1967-1968; Fresno, the largest agricultural county in the 
State, only .50 man-years; .Merced, .42 man-years; Riverside, .13 
man-years; Sacramento, .13 man-years; and San Luis Obispo, .05 
man-years. — ^^ Eight county health departments, including the 
one for Tulare (the second largest agricultural county in the 
State) , reported no time expended on enforcement. Twenty other 
departments devoted a total of .6.18 man-years to the problems. 

While county sanitarians contend that enforcement efforts 
have increased in the last year, Warren Holm, Environmental 
Consultant, admits that most of the augmented effort has cone in 
eleven counties where federal funds have been distributed through 
the Farm Workers Health Service Environmental Health Program. — ' 
The problem i/hich is arising in these counties is that local 
boards of supervisors have refused to appropriate county funds to 
match the federal effort and, consequently, federal officials 

have decided to cut off the federal funding of on-going sanitatioi. 

32' 
enforcement, arguing that it is a^ State and local responsibility- 
San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties lost their federal 
funds in 1969. Monterey and San Benito Counties are losing 

27 i federally-funded sanitarians this year; the remaining counties 

28 



JO I - — State Senate Sanitation Report, Table 1. 

30|] — '^ Conversation of Warren Holm. with James' D. Lorenz, Jr., 
California Rural Legal Assistance attorney, March 12, 1970. 

3 2/ 

— ^ U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 

"Introduction to Guidelines for Migrant Health Projects 
Offering Direct Care," February, 1970. 

-18- 



31 
321 



5239 

should be "phased out" in 1971. The results of the "phase- 
out" can already be perceived. The number of field inspections 
made in San Benito County has fallen from 423 in 1967-1968 to 
81 in. 1968-1969. ~ • ■ . 

Holra is not optimistic about the willingness of counties 
to appropriate their ovm money for sanitation efforts, once the 
federal funds are withdravm. San Benito County, for example, is 
making no effort to replace the sanitarian v;ho was lost when 
federal funds were cut off.' Similarly, in Santa Barbara and 
San Luis Obispo Counties, the Boards of Supervisors have failed 
to augment local enforcement efforts. Madera County has had no 
health officer since the last health officer went to Kings 
County. He left because the Madera County Board of Supervisors 
was unwilling to, in his view, adequately budget the county 
health depar-tment. Though- the County has been advertising for a 
new health, officer, the salary which they are willing to pay 
is the second lowest of any county in the State. (Merced County, 
another agricultural county immediately to the north of Madera, 
is the lov/est.) And they have been unable to hire anyone. 
Because the County has no health officer, as is required by law, 
the County may lose federal and State public health funds. The 
report which the former health officer. Dr. Douglas B. Wilson, 
filed with the federal government on June 30, 1969, illustrates 
the extent of the problem: 

~" [There is] inadequate comprehension of the needs 
of the county health department by elected and 
appointed officials. If the latter do in fact 
understand the need for staffing (salaries and 
additional personnel) and equipment to adequately 
administer a program that truly complies with 
Schedule A: Health Officer Certification , their 
actions (or lack of) did not demonstrate an under- 
standing. Their attitude may be perfectly valid 
if they are carrying out the wishes of the 
electorate. . 

"It will take years of health education to change 
this climate, if ever. 



-19- 



5240 

1 I "The strength of the department is in its 
dedicated personnel who for various personal 

2 I reasons choose to v/ork under conditions not 
ordinarily acceptable to government employees 

3 J or those of private industry. 

4Q "The volume of administrative v;ork...is insur- 
mountable.... This present writing and detailed 

5 J . minutiae is being drafted by the health officer 
himself, in longhand . The dictating equipment 

C| is inoperable, it is impossible to delegate 

because the staff have more than they can do." 

7 

8 
9 

10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 



If- the county health departments are not able to pick up 
the slack in lav/ enforcement, no ether public agency is likely to, 
since, under California lav?, the local health departments are 

given "primary responsibility" for enforcing the field sanitation 

33/ 

efforts. — C. F, Bryson, Jr., Program Supervisor for the 

field sanitation efforts of the State Department of Public Health, 
admits: "There is minimal effort on our part. We don't have 
the staff." The three regional- supervisors in the State Depart- 
ment v/ho are assigned to field sanitation problems spend their 
time contacting local health departments and encouraging them 
to work on sanitation problems. "We have not looked at the , 
departments to see what they are doing," Bryson says. Nor does 
the State Department make direct field inspections or require the 
counties to ,>-eport on their field sanitation enforcem.ent efforts 
or require them to prosecute violators of the law — even though, 
under the Health and Safety Code, the State Department must set 

standards for the operation of county health departments and must 

34/ 

control and regulate their action?, — 

The State Senate Sanitation Report, which revealed glaring 
inadequacies in local enforcement of sanitation laws, has been 
out for two years, but the State Department has made no follow- 
up study of any kind, to see whether the county health depart- 
ments are doing a better job. The Stanislaus County Director of 



— ' Memo from Frank M. Stead, supra , 



32 1 3£/ c^iifoi-nia Health and Safety Code §§1130, 207. 

'* ■ 

-20- 



5241 

1 I Environmental Health states that there is not much coordination 
2 1 between the Stanislaus County Health Department and the State 
Department of Public Health, it being his belief that the State 



Department is focusing on migrant housing proble-ms, and is leavinc 



35/ 

5 1 to the counties the enforcement of the field sanitation lav/s.-^ 

6 1 The Division of Labor Lav/ Enforcement and the Division 

7 1 of Industrial Welfare, which assist local health depar trrients in 
8 1 enforcing sanitation requirements, are understaffed right nov;, 
91 and are likely to be cut 10% to 20% more, if the budget cuts 
10 1 authorized by the Governor are approved by the Legislature this 
jl year. DIW and DLLE each have one investigator, for example, for 
12 the four county area of Santa Clara, Koriterey, San Benito and 
138 Santa Cruz — the primary vegetable growing area in the United 
14 1 States. One agent covers Stanislaus, and part of San Joaquin, 

15 1 Counties for the DLLE. — ^^ 'DLLE reports that because of its 

16 I understaf f ing, once a labor contractor has been warned on viola- 
17 1 tions of the law, the DLLE agents rarely have the time to return 
isl to the delinquent's property to see whether he is in compliance 
19 1 v/ith the law. Only able to avail themselves of these "one shot 
20 I checks," the DLLE is often not able to keep enough pressure en 
21 j growers to assure more than temporary compliance. The Division 

22 I of Industrial Safety, a State agency which also supposedly gets 

23 involved in field sanitation enforcement from time to time, re- 
24b ports that, given its understaf f ing problems (and an anticipated 
25 y 20% cut in its funds this year), it is able to do virtually 



26 
27 
-28 
29 
30 
31 
32 



nothing about field sanitation violations which it runs across 

37/ 

while undertaking field inspections.- — ^^ The problem has been 

stated most succinctly by a representative of the Division of 



— Conversation between Jim Mankin, Director of Environn'enta] 
Health for Stanislaus County, and. John Kelley, California Rural 
Legal Assistance attorney, March 6, 1970. 

— ^'^ Interview of Jim Mankin, supra , footnote 35. 

37/ . • 

— Conversation between C. F. Bryson and James D. Loronz, Jr.-, 

California Rural Legal Assistance attorney, March 12, 1970. 

-21- 



5242 

the Industrial Welfare, Chester DeRoo: "It is almost an 
insurmountable task." — ' . 

■ B. Health Departments Rely on '"Education" Rather 
Than Lav/ Enforcement. _ 

The lack of money is part cf the problem for many 

county health departments. But even if more money were provided 

to many counties, sanitation violations would continue, for as 

one farm worker from South Modesto has aptly put it: "The 

growers knov/ that some health departments are just a bunch of 

'39/ 
cookie pushers who are afraid to come down hard on the law." — 

This view is corroborated by statements cf certain grov;ers. "I 

knov; that the health department isn't going to sic the district 

attorney on me," stated one San Joaquin Valley grov.'er who wishes 

to remain anonymous. "If their investigator does come around, 

and finds out I don't have' a toilet in the field, he'll ask me to 

get one in. That's all. So I figure to wait until they catch 

me, then put in the toilet for av/hile, and then not worry about. 

it." As Denny Hackett, the field foreman for the S. R. Gerrard 

Cauliflower ranch in Santa Barbara County, said on October 8, 

1969, to CRW. investigator Israel Torres: "Go ahead and turn in 

your report. I don't care. I know the people in the health 

department. The workers don't need the facilities. They can 

■I 40/ 
p and s in the fields. — 

Most county health departments spend their time on 

education, rather than enforcement. "I have had to strike the 

word 'enforcement' from my vocabulary and use the word 'education 

instead," admits Roland Perkins of the San Benito County Health 



38/ 

— Letter from Chester DeRoo to Carlos Ynostroza, California 

Rural Legal Assistance attorney, September 11, 1969. 

39/ 

— Northern Santa Barbara County, for example, employs 

five sanitarians, but continues to have a very high number of 
violations. 



40/ 



Declaration of Israel Torres, supra , footnote 5. 

-22- 



5243 

41/ 

Department, — . "This has been a traditional situation with most 

of them," comments V/arren Holm of the Farm V/orkers Health Service 
when describing the "educational" approach to everything taken by 
local. health officials. The State Department of Public Health 
states that it has distributed 23,000 brochures on field condi- 
tion requirements in the past two years. After more than four 
years of advertising to growers and labor contractors that they 
must provide toilets and handwashing facilities v/herever food is 
grov/n and harvested, some health officials still contend that 
employers violate the law because they are ignorant of its require 

r> 

ments. Others, such as Dr. Matthis of the Santa Clara County 
Health Department, say that they fear they will lose what little 
"cooperation" they now get from growers if they adopt a law 
enforcement approach. In Maderja County, the grov/er-dominated 
Board of Supervisors closely regulates the manner in which the 
health department works. 

In keeping with the "education only" approach, at least 
nine counties failed to undertake any field investigations on the 

o^-m initiative in 1967-1968, relying solely on the complaints 

42/ ■ 

which were reported to their offices. — ^^ 

Not surprisingly, with their health officials rarely out 
in the fields in contact with farm workers, these counties rarely 
received any complaints. The record of the most aggressive 
county departments, such as Monterey, clearly indicate that in 
order to turn up violations, the departments have to repeatedly 
initiate unannounced visits. Thus, in 1967-1968, two county 
health departments made 40% of all the investigations in the 
State, and uncovered more than '50% of all the violations reported 
By contrast, thirteen departments which acted only or primarily 



—' Conversation between Roland f>erkins and Diane Delcvett, 
California Rural Legal Assistance attorney, March 11 , 1970. 

— State Senate Sanitation Report, Table 1, p. 11. 

-23- 



5244 

1 J in response to complaints reported that they had not uncovered 
jn a single violation.. 

3 Other counties v/hich make field investigations often do 

4 so in a sloppy manner. It is fairly common for agents to observe 

5 a fijld from the road and, if they note one or more portable 

g| toilets in the field, they drive on, assuming that the employer 

43/ 

yR is in compliance v/ith all sanitation requirements. — The fre- 



quency of these sloppy "investigations" is apparent in statistics 
released by the State Senate in 1968. For example, Stanislaus 



joy County reported 330 investigations, but no drinking cup violation; 



whatsoever, even though drinking cup violations v/ere frequently 
noted in counties "which made comprehensive inspections. Santa 



231 Clara reported zero drinking cup violations, and only three 



instances of failure to provide toilets, out of some 254 inspec- 
tions. Santa Cruz County rioted no violations in 1,942 inspections 



16 H as compared with the 1,023 violations noted in neighboring 

H ' 44/ 

17 n Monterey County in the same year. — Madera County merely failed 



18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 



• 4 5/ 

to record any of the violations v;hich they may have observed.- — 

(In 1969, a grower named Harley Phillips was found by CRLA 

investigators to be in violation. After inspecting his property, 

the Madera County Health Department reported no violation. At the 

same time, hov/ever, the DLLE investigated, and found so many 

violations that it issued a citation against the grower.) 

When a department has no on-going field sanitation 

program, the tendency is to make a massive survey of just one area 

for one season to justify the department's lack of commitment to 

law enforcement. Employers know from experience that such a surve; 



43/ 

— ' Ed Kerry, California Rural Legal Assistance Attorney, 

"Evaluation of Effectiveness of Local Enforcement Authorities, 

March 10, 1970. 

44/ 

— State Senate Sanitation Report, Table 1, p. 20. 

il/ Ibid. 

-24- 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
•22 

23 

24 

25 

26 



5245 

will be made only once and v/ill not recur if. the st£iti£tics are 
not, too shocking. In Santa Clara County the health departricnt 
inspected 738 food crop grov/ing and harvesting locations bctv/esn 
June 18 and September 8, 1969. One hundred twenty-eight either 
had no toilet facilities or had inadequate facilities. In spite 
of this large number of non-complying locations and the hundreds 
of farm workers compelled to v/ork at jobs v;ith no sanitation 
protections, the health department stated:- "Because of the high 
level of compliance v/ith the Food Crop Growing and Harvesting 

laws..., it is recommended that the program be continued in the 

46/ 
future on a referral or complaint basis. — 



• The' ineffectuality of the health departments leads to a 
self-fulfilling prophecy: Because the departments respond only 
to complaints v;hich are never made, or make sloppy inspections, 
they are able to report that there are no problems "apparent" in 
their counties. It is almost an ideal system, if you are a 
delinquent grower or labor contractor. 

Even where violations are reported, the response of many 
counties is ineffectual. The inspection form given to a 
delinquent grower by the Yolo County Health Department fails 
to even inform the grower that he is in violation of the law. A 
number of county sanitarians give a delinquent grower a "talking 
to," rather than handing him a written warning. Thus, as in 
Madera County, they have no complete record of who is, or has been 
in violation. If a verbal warning proves insufficient, many 
health departments will call the delinquent into their office for 

27 B a chat, or, as some say, "an informal hearing." A farm worker 
-28|v/ho has complained about the delinquent has no assurance that he 

2^1 will be present at this hearing. If the delinquent still fails 

30 1 to comply, he may be given a written citation in a few counties 

31 



321 — Herbert Schirlc, Santa Clara Health Department, Memorandum 

on The 1969 Survey of Food Crop Growing and Harvesting," Oct. 31, 
1969, p. 5. -25 - 



36-513 O - 71 - pt.8-A -- 18 



5246 

1 fl notably, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, San Joaquin and Stanislaus, 

2J but in most counties, he most likely v/ill be given another vrittei 

38 notice. The procedure which Santa Barbara County follov/s is 

4D illustrative: "1) Inspection, 2) reinspection, 3) written 

5 notice, 4) reinspection, 5) office hearing, 6) referral to DA." 

6 V.Tiils a fev/ departments give delinquents tv/enty-four to forty- 

7 eight hours to comply, most are considerably more lenient. In 

8 1 1967-1968, Sonoma gave five to fifteen days'; San Diego, one to 

I 47/ 

91 fifteen days; Yolo, seven days; Kings, five to fourteen days. — 

loB Not surprisingly , few, if any, growers are found to be 
11 I in violation at the end of this involved process of bureaucratic 
12 1 delay. Most county health departments don't have staffs adequate 
13 1 enough to make repeated visits. Moreover, by the time that a 
14 1 second or third reinspection v.'puld take place, the farm workers 
15 j hired by the grower are likely to have moved on to another place 
IGu of employment. Repeated checks on a v;idespread basis are 
171 impossible during the peak of the harvest. I 

Even where some health departments have been willing to 
take violators to court, they have often been unable to secure the 
assistance gf local district attorneys' offices. "Public health 
is of zero importance to most district attorneys," Warren Kolm 
says. Not only do the district attorneys require "a very 
serious case" of continuing violations before they will consider 
doing anything, but they often refuse to rely upon health depart- 
ment investigations, contending that if investigations are to be 
made, they will have to be done by their offices. Since the 
district attorneys do not want to tie up their own investigative 
resources, they are even less willing to become involved. 
According to the State Senate Sanitation Report of 196 only 
three criminal complaints were filed in the whole State in 1967 



18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 



47/ 

— State Senate Sanitation Report, p. 20, 

-26- 



5247 

and 19C8 recjardiny field sanitation requirements. — ' In I'orn 
and Tulare Counties, v/herc farm v/orkcrs exerted the most pressure 
for criminal prosecutions, at least tv/o criminal coini-;laints v/ere 
filed in 19G8 and 1969, but that v;as about the only action taken. 
The position of the Kir.gs County district attorney was typical: 
V7hcn informed that VJestlake Farms (v;hich had received $341,797.00 
in federal crop subsidies in 1968) was guilty of mjltiple violatior 
of sanitation lav;s, he refused to take any action, advising the 

agent for the Division of Industrial Relations that he v/ould need 

49/ 
four or fxve more violations before he could do anything. — ' 

Although labor contractors have an even higher violation 

rate than do. growers, the Division of Labor Law Enforcement has 

made clear in Kern, Tulare and Kings Counties that no matter how 

many violations are reported for a given farm labor contractor, 

the Division v;ill not act to revoke or suspend his contractor's 

license, despite its clear authority to do so. — According to a 

policy apparently promulgated in the Division of Industrial 

i 

Welfare, the DLLE agents feel they are not authorized to file 
criminal conralaints v/ith the appropriate district attorney even ii 

- 1 4-- U J 51/ 

recurring violations are observed. — • • 

The unwillingness of certain agencies to act is under- 
scored when, a few instances of tough enforcement which have 
occurred are considered. For example, at least eight citations 
were filed in Madera Justice Court by the Fresno office of the 
Division of Labor Law Enforcement in September, 1969. If. other 
offices of the DLLE and the DIW had been willing to take 
similar action, the number of violations in the State might 



4 8/ 

— ' State Senate Sanitation Report, Table 2, p. 12. • 

49/ 

— ' Ja.-cs Smitla, California Rural Legal Assistance attorney, 

"Statistical Summary of Violations Observed, Report to State 

Agencios and Action Taken," August 1, 1969. 

— / Sec Labor Code §1690 (f). 

— Smith, supra , footnote 49. 

-27- 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

U 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 



52 



5248 

have been reduced appreciably. . • . ' 

Many local health offices contend that they do not issue 
v/ritten . citaLions themselves because they arc not legally 
authorized to do so. They fail to add that the power to issue 
citations could immediately be granted to sanitarians if local 
health offices requested local sheriffs to deputize sanitarians-.-^' 
This approach, v/hich is completely valid and possible under 
California lav;, has been undertaken by a .fev; county health 
departments, notably in Riverside and San Joaquin Counties. 
Monterey County is also now considering empov/ering its sanitarians 
to issue v/ritten citations, V.'hile health officials in these 
counties aCfC'nov;ledge that even with the pov/er of deputization, . 
written cit:a.tions are rarely issued, they argue that it nonethe- 
less functions as a more effective deterrent than does the purely 
educational campaigns carried out by most health departments. The 
main advantage of the citation method is that it enables the local 
health department to call a violator into court on its own 
initiative, without reliance upon initiation by the district 
attorney. COf course, if the case is contested by the alleged 
violator, the district attorney will have to enter the case, but, 
as v;ith traffic citations, he then does not have the discretion 
to refuse to enter the case.) 

While some local health officials admit that the citation 
method is looked upon with favor in progressive sanitarian circle: 
a number o£ counties resist this approach. "Not yet," says Mr. 
Perkins, the San Benito County sanitarian. — Doug Pratt, the 
chief sanitarian for Madera County agrees, contending that if the 
health departments took peace off icer 's duties, they could "make 



—^ California Penal Code §830.6. Under §26625 of the Califor- 
nia Health and Safety Code, sanitarians nay already have this 
power. 

53/ 



Conversation between Mr. Perkins and Diane Delcvett, supr a, 
32 [ footnote 41. 

-28- 



5249 

1 mis lakes." ^-^' The Santa Barbara Health Departments says it doesn't 

2 use the citation method befausc it feels that farmers "v/ill come 

5 5/ 

3 around better" v/ithout using it. — Santa Barbara's approach 

4 differs from that of San Luis Obispo County, which issues condi 

5 tional citations, v/hereby a citation is issued, but is then v/ith 

6 drawn if the violations have been corrected in one day 

7 Farm v/orkers are cynical about the unv/illingness of any 
county health departments to get tough v;ith persistent grov/ers. 

9 The farm v;orkers knov; that if they disobey a lav;, they are likely 

10 to be prosecuted. Yet, they v/atch many of their bosses break the 

11 lav; with iinpunity, year after year. As one farm v;orker said: "Vh 

12 get prosecuted; they're given pamphlets." 

13 

C. In Failing to Enforce Sanitation Requirements, 
14 Many County Health Departments Are In Violation 

of the La\7. 
15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

54/ 

2Q — ^^ Conversation between Doug Pratt and Chris Bradford, 

California Rural Legal Assistance law clerk, March, 1970. 
31 

— Report of Dan Morpor, California Rural Legal Assistance 
32 law clerk, on sanitation lav/ enforcement in Santa Barbara 

County, March 11, 1.97 0. 

-29- 



Section 4 52 of 'the California Health and Safety Code 
provides that county health offices shall enforce all statutes 
relating to the public health. Many counties have failed and/or 
refused to do so. In particular, Santa Barbara, Madera, Kings 
and since 1969, Yuba-Sutter and San Benito Counties have failed 
to enforce public health statutes.. 

Section 453 of the Health and Safety Code states that 
"[e]ach county health officer shall report to the State Departmen . 
all violations of the State health lav.'s that come to his 
attention." With the exception of those counties presently 
funded by the Fc^Iaral Migrant Health Project, most or all of the 
counties in the State have failed to comply with this provision. 

Section 26604 provides: • 



5250 

"i'hc <lj.sLrict attorney of each counLy shall 
prosecute all violtitions of the provisi.oiii; of 
this; chapter Irelating to fie]d sanitation and 
adulterated food] occurring v.'ithin the county." 
(Emptiasis added.) ■■ ■ . 

Every district attorney of every agricultural county in the State 

has failed to comply v/ith this provision, v/ith the exception of 

not more thain ten cases in four counties in the past three years. 

D. In Failing to Supervise Local Health Departinents 
and To Enforce Health Laws, the State Department 
of Public Health Is In Violation of the Lav/. 

Section 200 of the Health and .Safety Code charges 
the State Department v/ith the responsibility of examining the 
causes of communicable disease in m.an and domestic animals 
occurring or likely to occur in the State. Section 201 says 
that the Department "shall call a special investigation of the 
preparation of the sale of drugs and food and their adulteration." 
In failing to exam.ine the serious problems of field sanitation 
which were raised by the State Senate Sanitation Report, the 
State Department has failed to comply v/ith both of these pro- 
visions. In failing to take any action to require local counties 
to enforce sanitation requireraents , the Department has also 
failed to comply with §202, which says that it "shall perform 
such duties as are required by law fcr the detection and preventi 
of the adulteration of articles used for food and drink, and for 
the punishmsnt of persons guilty of violation of any law pro- 
viding against their adulteration." 

Section 207 provides that when, in the judgment of the 
State Department, the public health is menaced, it shall control 
and regulate the action of local health authorities. Despite 
firm deterrrtinations by the California Legislature that public 
health is menaced when adequate sanitation facilities are not 
provided in food crop areas, the State Department has taken no 
action to control and regulate the action of ineffectual 
county health departments. 

•r30- 



5251 

Under the Health and SafcLy Code, a State Department can 
provide State financial aid to local county health departments 
v/hich incct minimal standards, but, under §1155, no funds niay 
be a^llocatcd to any local health department v/hich does not meet 
minimal standards. Despite the fact that the efforts of some 
health departments in the area of field sanitation have been 
negligent, the State Department has made no determination v/hether 
State aid should be cut off to these delinquent local health 
departments. Nor has the State Board of Public Health made any 
determination, pursuant to §26623 about v;hether local health de- 
partii\ents are enforcing the lav7, even though there is clear 
evidence that they are not. Likev;ise, the State Board has made 
no effort to comply v.'ith §2663 0, which says that the Board may 
prescribe such rules and regulations relating to the operation 
of the local health departments as it may deem necessary fully to 
effectuate the provisions' of the Health and Safety Code. 

V , 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF. .- ' ' 

Given the serious problems heretofore cited, as well as 
the continuing violations of law, petitioners request the 
State Department of Public Health and various local county 
health departments to comply with legal requirements relating to 
field sanitation. In particular, petitioners request the 
following actions to be immediately undertaken by all county 
health departments and to be required of local health depart- 
ments by the State Department of Public Health: 

1) In each county where food crops are grov/n, the health 
department must employ, during the growing and harvesting 
seasons, one to five full time sanitarians, depending upon the 
size of the county, in order to enforce the field sanitation 
requirements. The number of sanitarians employed should be 

• -31- 



5252 



cop.sisLciiu with standards set by. the S,tate Board of l'a)jlic 
Heolth, based upon a determination by the State Board as to how 
many sanitarians arc necessary in the county. The standards 
should clearly indicate at v/hat point, and under v/hic'A circuja- 
stances, a local health department v;ill cease to function as an 
authorized representative of the State Department of Public 
Health. . ■ . •■ 

2) Local health departments must institute a program of 
field investigations made at the initiative of the department 

on a continual and unannounced basis -- rather than the com- 
plaint-initiated programs which now exist in certain counties. 

3) • All sanitarians v/ith the responsibility for 
enforcing field sanitation regulations must be deputized 

by the couaty sheriff at the request of the local health officer, 
pursuant to Penal Code §330.6; 'and the sanitarian empo'.vered 
to issue citations to violators of field sanitation laws. 

4) Whenever a grower or labor contractor is 
found to have violated the field sanitation laws for the 
first time during any one year period, he shall be issued 
a "conditional citation" requiring a justice or municipal 
court appearance by the delinquent unless the violation is 
cleared within 24 hours after the conditional citation is 
issued. . . • . ■ • 

5) • Whenever a grower or labor contractor is found 
to be in violation of the field sanitation laws on tv/o or 

more instances during any one year period, or whenever a grov.'cr 
or labor contractor is found in serious violation on even one 
instance, a non-conditional citation shall be issued to him by 
the local health departiiient, requiring him to appear in justice 
or municipal court. ■ • . 

6) Each violator shall bo required to state at the 
time he is given a citation, conditional or otherwise, the names 

-32- . ' 



5253 

1 of those packcxs, v/holcsalcrs/ Ccnnnert;, ox retailers to v/hon 

2 he sells produce. 

3 7) v;henever/ during any tv;o year period, any 

4 grov/cr or labor contractor is found by the local health depart- 

5 ment to be in violation of the sanitation lav/s on three or 

6 more occasions he shall be declared to be a "persistent 

7 violator." Once a month, a list of the names of "persistent 

8 violators" shall be sent to all fruit and vegetable v/holesalers 

9 and retailers operating v/ithin the State of California, along 

10 v/ith a letter from the State Department explaining their 

11 potential liability under Health and Safety Code §§26470, 

12 26510, 265.15 and 26520. The list shall also be made available 

13 to the public, including f arm v/orkers and consumers. 

14 8} All sanitation violations involving labor 

15 contractors should be made knov.'n to the labor commissioner 

16 who licenses labor contractors. If any labor contractor i-s 

17 guilty of tvjo o-r-=ie&s- violations , the labor commissioner 

18 should consider suspending his license for a certain number of 

19 days and placing him on probation. If any labor contractor 

20 is guilty of three or more violations during any one year 

21 period, his license must be revoked. 

.22 9J Tv;ice a year, each county health department 

'23 shall submit to the State Department a report setting forth 

24 what actions they have taken to enforce the sanitation 

25 laws,- including the number of complaints received, the num.ber 

26 of investigations initiated, the number and kind of violations 

27 discovered, and the action taken to correct the violations. 

28 Each year, the Stat- Department shall prepare a report, 

29 setting forth the information received from each county health 

30 department. 

31 /// • /// 

32 /// . . • /// 

-33- 



5254 

Petitioncri; submit that if the forerjoinrj step:; arc 
instituted, the State Department of Public Health will be 
able to insure a 9 5i improvement in food crop sanitation. 



Dated: March 26, 19 70 



Respectfully submitted, 



/s/ Janes Di Lorenz, Jr , 
James D, Lorenz, Jr. 



/s/ Diane Dolevett 



Diane Delevett 

Attorney for Petitioners 



-34- 



I 



5255 



ACCESS 

A Preliminary Position Paper 

Prepared by the 

Migrant Legal Action Program, Washington, D.C. 



Section I: The Problem 

All attempts to assist the migrant farmworker 
must initially address the basic problem of securing 
for outsiders -- health inspectors, O.E.O. funded 
employees, community or other organizers — access to 
the residential migrant camp. 

The migrant farmworker, as will be repeatedly 
emphasized in this report, is required to work a maximiam 
of working hours each day yet receives a minimum of 
monetary rewards for his efforts. He and his family 
customarily are forced by economic necessity and by 
the grower's dictates to live on his employer's property, 
thereby significantly diminishing the worker's freedom. _1/ 
As a result of this unfortunate anomaly, the migrant 
farmworker frequently requires the assistance of the 
members of the surrounding community, whether this be 
medical, legal, social, or other help. Yet when he seeks 
help, he has neither the time, the money, nor the 



_!/ See, e.g.. Grim, Willamette Law Journal , Vol. 6, No. 1, 
March, 1970, pp. 111-130. 

-1- 



5256 

transportation to leave the grower's fields or the 
confines of the residential camp to seek out the 
assistance that he requires. 

Nevertheless, the needs of the migrant will not 
disappear simply because he is unable to leave the 
grower's premises. The needs remain, and so, if they 
are to be met, it becomes imperative that the members 
of the surrounding community have the freedom to 
communicate with and associate freely with these farm- 
workers and to enter within the physical confines of 
the residential camps without fear of reprisal. In 
short, outsiders should be free to render to the migrant 
worker and his family those basic educational, medical, 
legal and other services that they so greatly require if 
their lives are to be improved ever so slightly. 2^/ 

By denying the members of the surrounding community 
the freedom to enter the camp, to exchange ideas with the 
migrant farmworker, and to serve him, the grower has 
transformed the residential camp into a prison and reduced 



2J Kent Spriggs, "Access of Visitors to Labor Camps on 
Privately Owned Property," University of Florida Law Review , 
Vol. XXI, 1969. 



-2- 



5257 

its residents to the status of serfdom. 3^/ As this 

Subcommittee has previously pointed out: 

"To the average person, it is inconceivable that 
his landlord should have the right to determine 
who shall, and who shall not be able to visit his 
home. But in the name of property rights, some 
owners of migrant labor camps pres\ame to bar all 
outsiders who, they, in their sole discretion, 
determine should be allowed to see the residents 
of the camp. In this way, they keep out not only 
just peddlers, but union organizers, priests and 
ministers, poverty program workers, lawyers, and 
so called do gooders, who they think might in some 
way interfere with the docility of their captive 
work force. "4/ 

To the average person the vesting of such all 
encompassing power in a single person may appear in- 
conceivable. But to the resident of the migrant labor 
camp, and to anyone who has ever attempted to assist the 
migrant and his family, the situation and the power are 
familiar ones .5^/ It is not unusual for an individual who 
has attempted to assist a migrant farmworker at his home 



3^/ "A member of a servile feudal class bound to the soil 
and more or less subject to the will of his lord, " Websters 
Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, G & C Merriam Co., 
Springfield, Mass., 1961. 

4/ "The Migratory Farm Labor Problem in the United States," 
1969 Report of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 
U.S. Senate, made by its Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 
pursuant to S. Res. 222, 90th Congress, 2d sess. as extended. 
A Resolution Authorizing a Study of the Problems of Migratory 
Labor, February 19, 1969, p. 49. 

5_/ See, e.g., Moore, Testimony to Senate Subcommittee on 
Migratory Labor Hearings, July 21, 1970, p. 3. 



-3- 



5258 

to return to relate the shock of encountering fences of 
barbed wire and electric cables, signs reading "Keep 
Out," "No Trespassing," "Private Property," "Non-Residents 
Not Allowed," a pack of unfriendly watch dogs, a group of 
large and always strong workhands , the hard face of the 
foreman or the grower, and far too often the wrong end of 
a gun. 6^/ 

The lack of access to the grower's camps for migrant 
farmworkers can be viewed from two perspectives — its 
cause, the grower's attitude; or the detrimental effect 
on the migrant farmworker. 

From the viewpoint of the grower, the denial of access 
to his residential camps to members of the outside community 
presents no problem at all. To justify his continual 
refusal to open his residential camps to those who wish 
to help the migrant farmworker, the grower has relied upon 
his legal rights as the sole owner of the property upon 
which the migrant workers reside. As a purely legal 



6/ See generally, Martin Carr, "Shame is Still the Harvest," 
New York Times , July 12, 1970; Newlon Lloyd, Testimony on 
Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers Powerlessness, Hearings 
before the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor of the Committee 
on Labor and Public Welfare, United states Senate, 91st 
Congress, August, 1969; Robert Coles and Harry Huge, "Peonage 
in Florida," New Republic , 161:17-26, 1969; New York Times , 
August 23, 1970, p. 1, section II. 



-4- 



5259 



matter, the growers' position is by no means correct. 

Yet while this position may ultimately be discredited by 

future judicial rulings, the growers' asserted absolute 

right over his property is almost universally honored by 

local law enforcement officials and prosecutors. 

The grower's traditional justification for denying 

access goes beyond reliance upon property rights. To 

justify this behavior, the grower frequently claims that 

there is no need for access to provide the requested service 

because he, the grower, provides for all the needs of 

"his migrants." 

"In some respects the relationship between farmers 
and migrants has overtones of paternalism, and the 
farmers sometimes are critical of 'outsiders' and 
'do gooders ' who are concerned about the welfare 
of ' our migrants . ' "!_/ 

This attitudinal problem has far reaching consequences 

and cannot be lightly regarded. Perhaps only unionization 

can create bargaining among equals, thereby altering grower 

attitudes. But without a clearly defined right of access 

or statutory protection, organizational efforts are 



_7/ "Farm Employer Attitudes Toward Mexican-American Migrant 
Workers," Eldon E. Snyder and Joseph B. Perry, Jr., Rural 
Sociology , Vol. 35, No. 2, January, 1970. 



-5- 



5260 

rendered far more difficult. From the viewpoint of the 

migrant farmworker living within the grower's camp, the 

denial of access to members of the outside community 

causes isolation and stagnation which imprints itself 

on every aspect of his social, political, psychological 

being. 8^/ Dr. Robert Coles summarized the impact upon 

the migrant farmworker of being forced to live in total 

isolation: 

"They come and they soon leave. They not only 
do this but they know they do, and they feel the 
implications of their behavior, the facts of their 
arrival, work and departure in isolation from the 
life of the various communities whose fields they 
infiltrate and work. "9^/ 

"A migrant camp is a microcosm of nearly every 
social ill, every injustice: poverty almost beyond 
belief, rampant disease and malnutrition, racism, 
filth and squalor, pitiful children drained of 
pride and hope, exploitation and powerlessness ..." 10/ 

The isolation of a group of human beings is unnatural. 

Every human, no matter how transient his life may appear, 

does reach out by instinct to find some sense of identity. 



8/ See generally, Spriggs, supra . ; N. Compton, "Green Valley 

Isn't So Jolly: Migrant Labor Camp Conditions, Yakima," New 

Republic , 159:19-20, 1968; Huge and Coles, supra. , "Peonage 

in Florida. " 

9_/ Robert Coles, Subcommittee Report, 1969. 

10 / Senator Walter Mondale, Hearing of Senate Subcommittee 

on Migratory Labor, Monday, July 20, 1970. 



-6- 



5261 



some type of roots, some place recognized as his, even if 
for just a little while. 11/ Yet the migrant farmworker 
cannot find this sense of belonging in the residential 
camps of the growers. Within the grower's camp, the migrant 
can find no time within his long day in which he can establish 
some type of structure for his family. He usually has no 
place where he can go, shut the door and be his own master. 
When his child gets sick, he has no doctor he can call. 
When he has a problem, he has no one outside the migrant 
community he can turn to. When he finds some time for 
relaxation there is no place where he is allowed to invite 
friends from outside the camp. In short, the migrant has 
nothing tangible that he can call his own while residing 
within the residential camp. 

/ The migrant farmworker recognizes his own needs and 
those of his family, and so he attempts to reach outside 
the world of the residential camp to find the educational, 
medical, legal, social and other services he knows he needs 
if he is ever to cease being a poorly paid, transient 
laborer. Yet it is difficult for the migrant farmworker 
to reach out and obtain the help he needs. The migrant's 
long workday and lack of money and transportation make it 
physically difficult for him to leave. The fact that the 



11 / See generally, Robert Coles, Migrant and Seasonal 
Farmworkers Powerlessness, July, 1969, Part II, page 349. 

-7- 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 19 



5262 

migrant does move from place to place denies him any 
political voice he might use to gain his freedom. 12/ 
His lack of money will not allow him to simply give up 
the life of the grower's camp. His language barriers, 
color, cultural differences, and lack of education make 
it nearly impossible for the migrant farmworker to 
establish any sort of life, if he were able to 
leave the residential camp. Without the ability to have 
the help he so desperately wants and needs come to him, 
the migrant farmworker is trapped in the world created 
for him by the grower. 

The result of the migrant's physical environment is 
the creation of a life style marked by extreme fear and 
psychological struggle. What does the migrant farmworker 
do to adjust to the physical environment created for him 
by the grower? He copes. He sublimates his anger and 
transforms his fear and frustration into complacent in- 
difference ._13/ The migrant farmworker is trapped. 

"We the migrants live in fear because we have 
been indoctrinated with it. We live in shame. 



12 / See generally, Spriggs, supra . ; 111 congressional Record 

13,330 (1933); and Grim, supra. 

13 / Coles, supra . , Sub-Committee Report. 



-8- 



5263 



because we are treated as the scum of the nation. 
And we live in hopelessness for experience has 
shown us that there is no road open to us except 
back to the field. "14/ 



14 / Elijah Boone, Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers Power- 
lessness. Part I, June, 1969, page 174. 



-9- 



5264 



Section II: Attempted Solutions 
And Their Results 



The first step that must be taken to end the 
mic,rant farmworkers' return "to the field" it- a cleau 
resolution of the access problem. Those wishing to 
help the migrant must be able to reach hMr^, make him 
aware of his rights, advise him of solutions to his more 
pressing problems, and render short-term health, educa- 
tional, and legal assistance within the migrants' own 
milieu. By reaching the migrant within the growers' 
camp, the individual attempting to provide the assistance 
is able to meet and talk with the migrant without being 
hindered by extraneous pressures. These pressures include 
the necessities of finding the money and transportation to 
reach any outside source of help; having to give up a 
day's pay, and sometimes to jeopardize an entire 
job, in order to obtain help; and counteracting the 
intense psychological pressure of isolation — the knowledge 



-10- 



5265 

that he is all alone, and that there is no one who can 
take his side. 

The earliest response to the problem of access 
involved the institution of a variety of forms of test 
litigation designed to challenge the right of the 
grower to prevent individuals interested in assisting 
migrants from entering the residential camps and meeting 
with the migrants in their "homes" or in the community 
areas of the camp. 

The most common factual pattern giving rise to 
this litigation can be summarized as follows: 

The grower offers little objection to visitors. 
He is either unaware of their presence — e.g., they 
are minority "outreach" workers from social service 
programs; because they visit surreptitiously; or because 
they dress to blend in with the migrants. in other cases, 
outsiders are expressly permitted to come and go freely 
since they provide services which make "his" migrants 
"happy workers." Contained within that group which is 
often allowed free access to the migrant residential 
camp are nurses and individuals who run educational 
programs for the children. It it only when those who^i 
the grower deems undesirable enter the camp — i.e., 
individuals whose occupation or ideology make them 

-11- 



5266 

destined to "cause troioble" — that the grower will begin 
to restrict access. Those contained within the group of 
"troublemakers" are those who assist the migrant to 
qualify for the food or welfare programs, those who 
inspect for the housing code violations, and those who 
inform the migrants that they do have rights and provide 
advice as to the enforcement of these rights. 

The first step is posting the property with "No 
Trespassing" or similar signs. Next come the verbal 
threats of arrest or even physical violence which too 
soon become commonplace. Then the police are called in 
to tell the visitors to leave or to arrest such visitors. 
Finally, when the threats and the warnings are ignored, 
or legal coercion is deemed inadequate, the grower 
resorts to physical violence. Indeed, the assaulted 
visitor may even be confronted with a criminal complaint 
alleging criminal trespass, vagrancy, or even assault, 
naming him as the Defendant. Also, the migrant, his 
family, and friends may be siibjected to various forms of 
reprisal including loss of employment and/or housing. 

A few cases raising access issues have been fully 
litigated. While they offer guidance to lawyers and 
judges involved in still pending cases, they are by no 



-12- 



5267 

means dispositive t>f this problem. The only clear 

statement of the right of access occurred in companion 

cases arising in the same state. In Oregon v. Cameron , 

290 F. Supp. 36 (D. Ore. 1968) , the Court held that 

VISTA volunteers were, in effect, government employees 

and therefore entitled to have trespass charges against 

them heard in federal court. When a companion case was 

heard by another federal judge sitting in the same Court, 

it was dismissed. ( Oregon v. Wilcox , Cr. No. 69-670, 

unassigned order 2-12-70) The judge in Oregon v. Wilcox 

accepted the VISTA volunteers contention that their First 

Amendment rights of free speech and association . should 

prevail over the property owners' use of the State's 

criminal trespass law in order to keep visitors out of 

his camp. Finally, in Dodge v. Nakai^ 256 F. Supp. 17 (N. D. Ariz. 1965 

a federal court held that an Indian tribe may not bar 

O.E.O. funded attorneys from the reservation when they 

seek to confer with their clients . 15/ 

These civil cases offer a modest beginning. 16/ Many 



15 / See also U.S. v. Shackney , 333 F 2d 475(1964), reversing 
on procedural grounds a vindication of access rights to 
prevent the involuntary servitude of the migrant residents. 
16 / Earlier cases include: Puerto Rican Farm Workers, et.al. v. 
K.D. Eatman, et.al. . Civil Action No. 68-1417 - Civ. - CF, 
D.C.S.D. Fla. (complaint dismissed by District Court, reversed 
and remanded by 427 F 2d 210 (5th Cir 1970) ) ; Curry, et.al., v. 
American Foods, Inc. , Civil Action No. 68-1286-Civ-CF, D.C.S.D. 

(footnote continued) 

-13- 



5268 

more cases have been filed and some still are pending 

before the courts. The problems which the more recent 

cases attempted permanently to alleviate were those 

of bringing medical and public health assistance to the 

migrants , 17/ providing them with legal advice, 18/ securing 

the right for migrants to invite guests to their homes 

within the confines of the growers' camps, 19/ and securing the 



16 / (cont.) Fla.; Spriggs v. Cayuga Producers Coop, Inc. , 

Civil Action No. 68-CV-291, D.C.N.D. N.Y. ; Degoliado v. 

Stokely-Van Camp, Inc. , Civil Action No. CV 69-183-D, 

D.C.E.D. 111. (pending). 

17 / Folgueras et.al., v. Hassle et.al. , currently before 

the United States District Court for the Western District 

of Michigan, Southern Division, and Linsay et.al. v. 

Hendershot , currently before the Supreme Court of the 

State of New York, County of Monroe. 

18 / Peper et.al., v. Cedarbrook Farms, Inc., et.al. , 

on appeal to the Third Circuit; California Rural Legal 

Assistance, Inc., et.al. v. Zanger, et.al. , brought in the 

United States District Court for the Northern District of 

California . 

19 / See the recently dismissed case of Teneyque, et.al. v. 

Ferris brought before the United States District Court for 

the Northern District of Iowa, Central Division. 



-14- 



5269 

rights of union organizers to solicit membership within 
the growers' camp. 20/ Irrespective of the civil cases 
which seek to establish access rights in an affirmative 
matter, there remains the deterrent effect resulting 
from the widespread use of the criminal law by growers 
and state officials to prevent access in migrant labor 
camps throughout the country .21/ 

The use of litigation in an affirmative manner; challenges 
to improper reliance on criminal law; and the 
growing militance of union and community organizers, social 
workers and young lawyers have escalated the level of 
conflict in access cases .22/ In a number of large 
states -- California, Michigan, and New Jersey, to name 
a few — a significant increase in hostility and often 
violence accompanied the growers' assertion of property 
rights. The difficulties resulting from litigation, in 
turn, have further increased the militance of the camp 
visitors and residents, leading to FBI and state law 
enforcement investigations, opinion letters and rulings 



20 / C.R.L.A. V. Zanger , supra. 

21 / See, e.g.. State of New Jersey v. Shack, et.al. , 
(Docket No. AM-369-69) ; "Visiting Rule Set on Migrant 
Camps, " New York Times , November 8, 1970. 
22 / See generally. Harper, supra . ; Morris, "Migrants 
Feeling New Power," Detroit Free Press , July 26, 1970; 
Sullivan, "U.S. Urged to Investigate Charges of Jersey 
Farmers," New York Times , August 23, 1970; "Jersey's 

(footnote continued) 
-15- 



5270 

by various attorney generals, legislative proposals, 
and attorney general statements on proposed rulings. 

Illustrative of the state access legislation is 
that contained in Governor Cahill's recent proposed 
migrant legislation. A section proposes to guarantee 
"reasonable visitation rights" for federal and state 
anti-poverty health and educational officials. While 
the section acknowledges the rights of these officials 
to carry out their duties, it also fully protects the 
growers' rights as landlord and employer. 

A similar approach has been adopted by recent 
Department of Justice Guidelines, which were proposed 
to resolve a continuing access controversy in Oregon. 
The guidelines were the result of negotiations between 
representatives of O.E.O. funded programs and grower 
groups and must be accepted by growers on an individual 
basis. Substantively, they provide that O.E.O. funded 



22/ (cont. ) Migrants: A Hardly Human Existence," New York 
Times, August 23, 1970; Sullivan, "Two Poverty Aides 
Arrested at Jersey Migrant Camp, " New York Times ; Berman 
and Hightower, "Battle for Lettuce," Nation, November 2, 
1970; Report to Subcommittee from Migrant Legal Action 
Program on Western Michigan violence (Carey letter, 
October 10, 1970) . 



-16- 



5271' 

employees may enter the camps after working hours or 
on non-working days for "reasonable" periods of time; 
that visits may be made during working hours only to 
serve non-working members of the family and migrant 
children; and the growers must receive in advance 
literature intended for distribution to the workers. 



-17- 



5272 



Section III: Conclusion 

The necessity of establishing a clear right of 
access to migrant labor camps should be obvious enough. 
However, the futility of present attempted solutions 
may not be so self-evident. 

The legislative proposals are far too narrowly 
conceived to provide any far reaching redress to the 
economic and politically powerless migrant. The New 
Jersey Bill and the Justice Department Guidelines share 
common basic flaws: both jealously guard the grower's 
property rights while ignoring the visitors' constitutional 
rights of free speech and association. It should be 
beyond dispute that visitation rights should not be 
made dependent solely on the visitor's employment by governmental 
agencies. Surely the migrants have in common with all 
other citizens the right of access to marketplace of 
ideas and the right to associate freely with all persons 
of their choosing. 23/ 



23 / The New Jersey bill is particularly weak since it 
requires an express or implied invitation to specified 
governmental officials before protection is afforded. 
Moreover, the only expressly conferred right is to initiate 

(footnote continued) 

-18- 



5273 

The Justice Department Guidelines must be faulted 
for expressly refusing to offer guidance for treatment 
of union and community organizers who seek to exercise 
their First Amendment and other rights. At best, the 
guidelines can be viewed as making a good start in 
reducing the level of animosity between O.E.O. funded 
organizations and local growers. 

There still remains a pressing need for a defin- 
itive legal opinion from the U.S. Attorney General. This 
opinion should unequivocally conclude that federal and 
state legislation designed to protect migrants — e.g., 
the Economic Opportunity and Migrant Health Acts, etc. — 
create an implied right of access at reasonable times 
during non-working hours and days, in emergencies, and 
generally in cabins where children and non-working members 
of the family reside. More importantly, the opinion should 



23 / (cont.) a legal proceeding to obtain protection against 
some future abridgment of rights. Nevertheless, Governor 
Cahill should be commended for frankly recognizing the 
problems. Other governors, facing similar problems, should 
be equally prepared to propose solutions to this long- 
standing, but egregious problem. 



-19- 



5274 

address itself squarely to the reciprocal nature of 
the constitutional rights of the visitors and the 
migrant residents .24/ This opinion would hold great 
moral force and would also govern the Department's 
enforcement of existing laws. 

The Justice Department can be much more vigorous 
in its enforcement of existing laws. Its Civil Rights 
and Criminal Divisions can invoke a multiplicity of 
laws, not the least of which is Title 18 USC Section 
§ 245. This new provision expressly protects against 
violence and intimidation of both visitors and migrant 
residents who are exercising their constitutional and 
civil rights. Despite a number of complaints to the 
Department, its protection has never been extended to 
the migrant cause. 

Test litigation designed to challenge the growers' 
persistent denials of access pose a number of legal 
problems which are beyond the scope of this report 
Suffice to say that the case law is less than crystal 
clear and that legal proceedings are slow to come to 



24 / Of course, the analysis should also employ the 
constitutional and labor cases balancing tests which 
recognize and protect the valid interests of the grower. 



-20- 



5275 

fruition. Meanwhile, the migrants remain culturally 
isolated and virtually enslaved within the confines 
of the typical labor camp. 

Not only is litigation in the area of access 
relatively new, but it must function within a system 
of many built-in handicaps. Primary among the problems 
faced by those who wish to develop a court case is 
that the migrants' transient life-style often renders 
any case legally or practically moot (i.e., there is 
no real controversy capable of judicial resolution) . 
Far too often, by the time an attorney researches and 
documents the case, the migrant plaintiffs and often 
all the witnesses have packed up and moved on, thus 
drastically altering the situation that the attorney 
is requesting the court to remedy. 

Second among the problems faced by anyone engaged 
in access litigation is that even the most rudimentary 
litigation requires at least three basic parties: first, 
a migrant farmworker who has requested help from a 
member of the outside community; secondly, a member of 
the outside community who has attempted to communicate 
with and/or render service to the migrant living in a 
grower's camp and has been denied; and thirdly, a camp 
owner who has denied entry to the camp, with or without 

-21- 



5276 



assistance of some local official. To find the 
necessary interaction between the three parties is 
very difficult, and willing plaintiffs are partic- 
ularly difficult to find. The individual who has 
been denied access is often a college student or a 
law student who has been volunteering for the summer. 
By the time a case begins to crystalize, he has returned 
to school and has become committed to other duties which 
preclude his participation in a court action. The 
migrant who has requested the help has almost always 
left the residential camp in question, and often cannot 
be located. If he can be located, he is often more than 
not reluctant to bring any type of action because he 
fears the repercussions such an action would inevitably 
bring, i.e., future jobs not only with that grower but 
often with many more growers in the same county or state. 
Furthermore, both the student and migrant parties' ways 
of life are also ill suited to the legal processes — they 
are frequently unavailable for the many appearances in 
court and in the lawyers' offices which are characteristic 
of protracted litigation. The grower, who has denied 
access, is also a reluctant defendant. The moment that 
he becomes aware that such an action might be brought. 



-22- 



5277 

he immediately contacts his lawyer who thereupon 
attempts to settle the matter or, failing that, enters 
into an interminable series of stalling tactics and 
compromise moves that sufficiently delay the case so 
as to render any ultimate decision all but meaningless. 

We sadly conclude that there is no easy panacea 
for this problem. We do believe, however, that a clear 
Congressional committment, definitive action by the 
Justice Department and their state counterparts, and a 
willingness of the federal and state courts to use 
available expedited procedures and relax other procedural 
rules that work a particular injustice to the migrant 
cause would immediately better the lives of the migrants. 
Only in this manner may the more persistent problems of 
the migrant — nutrition, health, education, housing, 
and employment — be systematically attacked and the 
needs met. While these basic migrant problems have been 
clearly identified, and in some instances responsive 
programs have been devised, the needy and powerless 
beneficiaries cannot be reaehed until the vestiges of 
the growers'' feudal power over his work force is eliminated. 
The first step must be the establishment and practical 
effectuation of the right to access. 



-23- 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 20 



5278 




SFCRTTARY OF H E A LT H . E D U C AT I O N . A N D WELFARE 
WASH I N G TO N. O. C 20201 



Honorable Walter F. Mondale 

Chairman hG .. ! 'i ^ 7 

Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 

Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 

United States Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20^10 

Dear Senator Mondale : 

Thaiik you for yoior letter of September 22, in which you requested 
specific information regarding the effect of the 1969 amendment to 
the extension of the Migrant Health Act, as well as program comments 
on other issues related to migrcint health. 

The migrant health program has attempted in the past twelve months 
to do two specific things : 1 ) expand and improve the quality of 
health care being funded through our migrant health projects j and 
2) formalize the relationship of consumer groups to the planning, 
development and implementation of projects. The newly-developed 
migrant health guidelines provide direction to this process. 
Specialists in health care administration, migrant project directors, 
and provider and consumer groups were consulted in the development 
of this document. These guidelines, a copy of which is enclosed, 
describe the criteria by which all projects will be judged, so that 
funding decisions will be based upon a well-established understanding 
between those attempting to provide services and those charged by 
legislation to administer these funds. The guidelines will be 
distributed in the near fut\are. 

The relationship of consumer representation on policy and advisory 
boards to project operations is outlined on Page 16 of this document. 
You will find the data requested on consumer control in the enclosed 
Table B. 

We in the Department have a strong commitment to the concept of 
consumer involvement. It is apparent, however, from examination 
of Table B that the total number of projects having consumer control 
of policy boards is very small, and our experience with the operation 
of these boards is too limited to permit adequate evaluation at this 
time. We must concede, therefore, that our experiences in consumer 
participation can be classified only as experimental. We are trying 
to intensify training activities, both for consumer boards and for 
project personnel so that consumer involvement can be more effectively 
utilized. Therefore, your question on how effective these boards are 
must await the answer of time. 



5279 



You also asked whether the Public Health Service has recently updated 
its State by State and coimty by county enumeration of agricultural 
workers in the United States. At the present time, updated figures 
are not available but the Coiranimity Health Service, which administers 
the migrant health programs, considers this effort top priority. 
Reliable data should be available by the end of the next migrant 
season. 

Much thought has been given to the necessity for new legislation 
which would authorize additional funds for the migrajit health 
program. Despite the fact that many of our migrant projects axe 
underfunded, money itself is not the total answer. While the 
ultimate costs of providing health care for migrant and seasonal 
farmworkers may well approximate, or, indeed, even exceed $100 
million as you suggest, funds of such magnitude probably co\ild not 
be effectively administered at this time. The assumption of many 
persons in the past has been that the only reason migrants could 
not get health services was that they could not afford them. Today, 
however, we are meeting increasing problems in purchasing such care 
since the inadeq\iacies in health facilities and the shortages in 
health manpower in rural areas have increased. 

As a result of this problem, the migrant health program has changed 
its emphasis, putting a higher priority on funding projects which 
will increase the capacity of the health system in these rviral areas 
to deliver care rather than compete for existing services. For 
example, we are encouraging projects to hire more paramedical 
personnel so that the very limited physician resources can be reserved 
for those duties requiring the unique skills of the physician. We are 
requiring projects to organize their services into family-centered 
health care to better utilize the time of the health professionals. 
Such reorientation of a program takes not only money, but time for 
planning and preparation. 

Thus we see two major efforts at this time: the first, an orderly, 
planned expansion of the program along the lines indicated above j 
and the second, a redirection of present program priorities from 
projects which do not influence the system of care in rural areas to 
new or expanded projects which will improve the availability of care 
in areas having large numbers of migrants and seasonal farmworkers. 

Finally, in your concluding paragraph, you ask what action our 
Department has taken in response to the conferees agreement (H.R. 
9I-6I8) "in opposition to program reorganization that destroyed 
the permanent and separate identity of the program." We recognize 
that the migrant worker and his family represent unique problems. 



5280 



but we eilso recognize that the migrant health program must have the 
benefit from the broader based knowledge of health economics and health 
care administration available within the Public Health Service. Many- 
individuals who have long championed the cause of the migrant worker 
have, however, continued to stress the value of an identifiable program 
focus to preserve the emphasis on the national scope of the migrant 
health problem. Accordingly, we are establishing a Migrant Health 
Branch which w111 achieve this result without in ajny way diminishing 
the availability of other staff resources which have proved so valuable 
during the past two years. 

I hope this information will be helpful to you. If there is any way 
we can be of fiorther assistance, please let us know. 

With best regards. 

Sincerely, 



Secretary 



t x-i 



A 



5281 



u 





u 


r-~ 


02 


u-i 




03 


to 




U) 




0) 


TO 


u 


C 


60 





C 


M 





•r^ 





!-i 




<C 



0) 





nj 


QJ QJ 


in 


4J 0) 


!-i 


00 


QJ C 


r^ iJ 




0) TO 


■4-1 to 




M ^ 




n] 


•u u 


"1 


C 


crt <; 


E 







(U CO 


M 


x: - 



TO 


01 


d 


3 • 







N 


<f 


■r-l 


cv] 


1-1 


^ J 


< 


■-1 c 



<D 


TO 


TO 




TO 


OJ •> 










QJ 





QJ TD 


0) 




<: 







^J r^ 


^ 


A 




■r^ 


" 


J-l QJ 


Vj 


>^ 


4J 


IM 


c 


to -H 


QJ 


QJ 


0) 


U-4 





U-1 


« 


r-l 


QJ 





4-1 


m 




QJ 


s 




^ 


u 


,_) 


^ 




4_) 





m Gj 


m 


^4 


in 


W 





^ 




QJ 


•d- 





4J 


vO TO 


<-vl 


P3 


<!• 


P4 


CO 


OJ pa 



<^ < 





^J 


u 










QJ 





"— 1 


QJ 





U 


U 


•H 

Q 







< 




Sj 


•Pi 


4J 


QJ 





C 


S> 


Si 


TO 


B 


M 


VJ 





RJ 





r-s 


<3* 



5282 



5>s-i 


T3 


o 


CO <D 


q; 


U-l 


S O 


S 


•r-t 


>^ - 


VM 


nj 


<u <u 


o 


o 


a. m 






e o 


1— 1 


•» 


Id I-) 


o 


10 




o 


•H 


o c 


JZ 


> 


O (0 


o 


(0 


r~ W 


to 


Q 



«-! O '-' ra 

•H • a) -w 

^ Oi 0) C 

n) M vi 

o c u o 

•H C/J u-i 

• to -H 

<U " CD o 

•H 00 1—1 

U-l <M 3 - 

U5 rn H O 

)- ^ C 

0) E 0^ to 

^ O O 01 

to O t^ )J 

PQ Oi CM fc 



4-1 00 -r^ 

cn m rH 
CM to 

■-3^0 



tU tN 


CM 


U O 


3 O 


O 


W <7< 


C 00 


OO 


o> 


(U 




T3 -1 


> 




u 


< o 


iJ o 


o 


T3 


<u -o 


M-l 0) 


JS to 


(U to 


•o u 


■u M 


l-i u 


to <D 






iJ M > 



U O 
to jO 

T3 x: 



i-l vo 
vo ro 
0\ en 



5283 



. 


3 


u-1 


U) 


d 


o 


Vj 


cu 


o 


•H 


> 


o 


m 


<: 


IN 


u-i 






M-( 


CO 




<C 


iJ 






■u 


O 



o ra 


(30 


S 


C 




•H 


U CM 


j: 


Q..-I 


01 


(1) m 


to 


Q -1 


S 



>J ^ X 3 



O CO 

CO s 



OJ 


■o 




TI 


c 


•H 




•r-( 


c 


(J 




U 


< 


o 


CX) 


o 




.-1 


r-^ 




0) 


ft. 


(N 


Ci4 



CSl - .-I 



S PC 





)-i 


u 


<u 


C 


^ 


ra 


S 


H 


D 


O 


2 



U) 


S 




C/3 


^ 




r-l 






O 


CO 




c 


u 




3 







O 


•^^ 




O 


01 




^1 


a. 




<u 


3 




^ 


CO 




u 






Q 


^J 




5 







4J 


to 




c 


X 




to 






u 


IW 




bO 







2: 


(U 

u 




1-1 


d 


d 


to 


dj 




C 


Vj 


g 





<u 





•H 
iJ 


li-l 

d 


s 


to 





t*-( 


z 









0) 0) OJ 

E -r-l C/3 

to J3 

1-3 O 






5284 



T3 <n 



in in 

00 00 

en ro 
I I 

o o 



O u 

• o 



X XI -l-l |i< 



,-1 


JS 


x; 


a) 




en r-l 


i—i 


u 


60 


Vj 


" 


S -"< 


•o 


vt 


•r-( 


j-i 


T3 


M 


ra - 


,—i 


(U 


Ol 


C 


J3 


o c 




W 




«) 


*J « 


cri -H 


iJ 




x: 


r-H 


U HI 


(U 


U) 


o 


4-1 


0] 


O rH 


C *J 


01 


M 


00 


M 


Z '^ 


■H W 


3 


CD 


t»l 




<u 


U f-t 




y 




^ 


o j: 


u <u 


<N 


•^^ 


0^ 


O 


VO O 


CO -O 


in 


J= 


f^ 


o 


O O 


S W 


•-' 


U 


O 


aJ 


r-l PS 



>. o .-' -u 



<2,S 



£ 


S o 


01 


c 


2 


4-> D 




C O 


en 


to u 


(U 


n 


C 


60 41 


o 


•r-l x: 


>^ 


2 ■" 



4-> D ^ r-l 



5285 





U r-H 


to 


(U vO 


u c 


4) r-. 


<U CO 


U CN 


OJ *r-l 


4J m 


U TJ 


OT 


*J C 




M M 


-0 to 



c 




•r-1 


•r-l 


CO CD 


o - 


00 


CO 


u 


S 


U >, 


r^ 


^r^ 


o 


jj 


u u 


CM 


3 


a 


0) « 


m -H 




O 


(U 


3 >^ 


6 O 


X 


hJ 


S 


O U 


M 


o 






O 3 


< 0) 


CO 


^ 


c 


hJ J3 


to 




<U 





05 


<*■ m 




U 


en 


4J -H 


r-l C 


o 


•i-( 


4-1 


to "-1 


O CD 




1 


CO 


01 CO 


r-l h^ 


cC 


3 


3 w 





<: 


Vj 


z 


4J (U 


< 


C J3 


M 


CO E 


Q 


U 3 


Z 


oz 





5286 



.-I vo in 0) 

.-I c-g ^ U 



\D <U 



(U 0) 


J3 


Q) 3 


4-> O 


M £ 


0) -H 


4J O 


0) S 


W (0 


Vl 


0) 


■u - 


4J CO 


oi C 


C CO 


(U 


O 2 


iJ > 


e 


C TO 


<u - 


to X 


n c 


u 


H O 


O T3 



0) 00 

> vO 

to ON 

H 



<u S 


-1 (10 


> 


i-H •^^ 


<: - 


•-^ J3 


>, 


33 y 


(U 4J 


•H 


;!«i -^ 


c s 


u o 


<U 


(D 


T3 - 


hJ m 


(d Xi 



<o to 

to ui 
to 0) 



(U 


4J 


•o 


c 


en 


dJ 


Q. 


c 


3 


•r-t 


J 


0) 


to 


O 


Q 


1 


Q 


u 


o 




(U 




o 




c 


O} 


x; 




n 


o 


u 


J-) 


J= 


o 


to 


(U 


(— < 


4J 


x> 


to 


> 


to 


•r^ 


CO 


S 


<0 


0) 


3 


hJ 




M 


X 






<u 


H 




C 


u 


<u 




>% 


o 


c 


■U 


■o 


tJ 


•r-( 


to 


to 


c 


c 


U 


u 


■r-l 


to 


3 


to 


00 


c 


u 


o 


)-■ 


•H 


to 


o 


CJ 


ID 


s 


X 



(1) o 

> ^ 

< 00 



5287 



o o 

tM PJ 



•fi S 



P 2 



o 


,-^ 


u 





•H 


o 


a. 


c 


!5 


•l-l 


o 


►J 



<U CD 

c > 

CD 0) 

s •> 

O en 

•a CO 

CD 00 



CM CO 






-1 c d 

CO ^ 0) 

(U o ^ 

W ►"} H 



a 




(U 


0) 


o 


o 




•H 


4-1 


> 


CO 


u 


CO 


(U 


w 


w 



(U 


J3 


0) 


{J 


»J 


r-l 


0) 


eg 


•^ 


0) 




a 


3 




0) 


«-l 


Z 


o 



to O 
3 fn 
O 00 



5288 



O P~ 

o in 



3 


(U 


2 


O 


l-l 




4-1 


to 


e 


W 


s: 


<u 


3 






o 


CM 


TO 


o 


o\ 


CO 



O <t 05 

• CM CO 

Oi 0^ hJ 



3C a) X -1 

0) (U CD 

w iJ a: 
c to 



OS 3 



<U 



O Z 

<t u -o 

CO - 

X dJ Vj (U 

O tLl -U fc. 

CO iJ CO 

• u u 

O c m c 

■ CO O CO 

f^ CO O QO 



0) 




3 


S 


vO 


<u 




O 


z 


? 


m 




<U 01 


r-* 


•* 


en Z 




CO 



•l-l 4J l-l 
'U (U 

O u . 



>> d o 

4J O <3\ 



O l-l >< 



CO OS Z 



rH 4J 


,-1 4J 


l-l *J 


CO CO 


CO CO 


CO m 


n> .r^ 


0) -.J 


0) -l-l 


« Q 


ac Q 


« Q 


<*-l CO 


U-l (0 


U-l CO 


O CU 


o <u 


(U 


(J 


CJ 


o 


• -l-l 


• -l-l 


• -M 


iJ > 


u > 


u > 


O. U 


o. u. 


a. Vj 



l-l X 



u 


M 


55 


O -tJ 


l-l 


M-l rH 


3 CO 


H-l CO 


CU (U 


3 (U 


2 PC 


CO * 



o r^ 


o o 


O (N 


o m 


>!■ en 


m n 


<t X 


cr> X 



5289 



u 


o 


to 


>-' 


■u 




en 


3 




(U 


(0 


z 


3 




o. 


n 


g 


^ 


CO 


0) 



M - 
U (1) 



OS pa cvi s<s w 3 



P4 <u Vj 

o o 

>^ -H 4J >l 

3 O >-" 0) 

O -u 2 

o oo to 
c 

Q) -r-l rH (0 

C U) l-l C 

>> iJ (0 O 

nj 3 0) Ps 

3 Z f^ iJ 



3 <3^ M 
O O O 
Q (N 2 



M 


x: 


C 


y X! 


0) 


4J 


CO 


•H o 


■U 


r-* 


n 


g^ 


m 


(D 


60 


i-H 


0) 


•H 


to J3 


D 


K 


s 


S O 



5290 



^ OO rH 



0) O 

U Si 









o 








(U 




u 




.vO 


o 


<1> 




4J .-1 


CM 


<u 


<t 


0) CM 


<t 


u 


CM 


Q) ro 


n 


4-1 


vO 


U <t 


<r 


CO 


n 


4J 






<r 


CO 




<u 




o 





•H 




C -H 




l-i 


o 


3 J5 


x: 


W 


•r-l 


O o 


0) o 




Xi 


H 


CO 


x: 


o 




3 - 


4-1 




4J (0 


O -u 


u 


* 


CO 


X. c 


o 


o 


CO J3 


U O 


z 


T3 


u § 


U B 




01 


3 



vO .-H O .-I 





x: 


u jz 


CO •r^ 




o 


u O 


J3 






CO 


<u o 




•» 




00 


<u 


0) 


x; J 


CO - 


en 


r-H 


o o 


4-> C 


3 


i-H 


u x 


u o 


O 


•r^ 


3 Vj 


O *J 


x: 


> 


x: CO 


(u e 



u en 


<0 


(U <r 


a 


0) 


o 


M 


XI 


4-1 o 


CO 


CO ■r^ 


d -1 


JC 


^1 ^ 



O f-1 

n o 



4-1 C 

C M 



O 4-1 



O X 



5291 



»o 


O " 


ji 


(y\ ao 


u - 


)-i 


3 13 


X 3 


O C 


O JQ 


M (t 


P3 (0 


1-1 


•rl 


O 4J 


• Vl 


O U 


o u 


«* O 


• ra 


rH (X4 


o, a 



2l 



0) o 






CT\ 


(U lO 


4-1 




r^ 


u r-. 


V 






U CO 


(U 






CO r^ 


M 




n 




4-1 




CO 


J2 


CO 




X 


4J OJ 




00 


0) 


0\ CO 


J3 


<r, 


H 


-a- X 


CO 


r^ 




0) 


<: 


r-l 


* 


u H 






;» 


CO 


73 


X 


(U 


<u ^ 


C 


O 


•H 


S (3 


CO 


pq 


> 


-H 






c 


O *J 


J2 




•r-l 


O (0 


4-1 


d 


eg 


•-I 3 


O 




r-H 


-I <: 


t-1 


cC 


04 



■a 

3 



u 


z 


U (U 


8 


CO E 
H 3 


§ 


O Z 


o 



13 


c 


T3 


>» 


V4 


3 


^4 


4J 


CO 


o 


CO 


(3 


O 


o 


o 


^ 


PQ 




M 


o 




c 




o 


(U 


o 


0) 




4J 


4J 


4J 


4-1 


CO 


m 


CO 


u 


4J 


0) 


4-1 


o 


CO 




v> 


M-l 




Vl 




3 


CO 


CO 


CO 


<S 


c 


J= 


C 


<U 


•1-1 


CJ 


■r-l 


« 



5292 



o o 


O 












pa oo 


j:: 


U 








CM 


in 


4J 


<U 








CM 


C 00 


M 


<u 








CO 


o r^ 


3 


l-l 






vO 


CJ^ 


oj 


O 


u 


<N 




r~ 


p^ 


(0 


o 


CO 


0-) 




O 




3 w 






n 




00 




O ns 


>.-o 


00 




r~ 


0) 


X X 


■u 


c 


r~ 






(0 


<u 


c 


o 








X 


E H 


3 


s 






u 


<u 


to 


o 


1— < 


U) 


in 


TO 


CM H 


CO " 


CJ 


<: 


nJ 


r~^ 


X 


vO 









X 


00 


<u 


<f - 


X! *J 


w 


J2 


4) 




H 


C 


U -H 


t— < 


■u 


H 


X 




X o 


Vj C 


.-1 


U 




o 


#* 


O iJ 


a) 


0) 


o 


" 


M 


(0 


PQ >% 


2: m 


3 


z 


(U 

o 




4-1 


J3 
• 10 


vO c 


a 


o 


-r-l 


O 


o. 


o o 


00 03 


■r1 


o 


r— 1 




CO 


• w 


■-I CO 


<-) 


CM 


< 


P^ 


M 


. cu o 



d 


(U 


m 


o 


0) 


vl- 


•r-l 


1-1 


C<J 


4-1 


4J 


cn 


ra 


00 


r^ 


V4 






(U 


j: 




n. 


u 


UI 


O 


00 


to 




t-H 


X 


>^ 




<u 


4-1 


J2 


H 


d 


4-) 




3 


V4 


•» 


O 


o 


w 


CJ 


2; 


x: 




m 


Q. 


t-H 


-d- 


a 


CO 


vO 


<u 


ac 


t-4 


s 



M 




4J a> 


CO 


C x> 

<0 E 


^ 


V4 3 


u 


O Z 


H 



^S 



6 6 

•r-l O 

•-1 U 



%* 




i-i 0) 


m 


to g 


^ 


i-i d 


w 


O Z 


H 



5293 



0) in 

to 00 



<u 


cr\ 


01 


en 


(J 


in 


u 


00 


CO 


r^ 


x: 




jj 


CO 


d 


ni 


•r^ 


X 


Z 


(U 




H 


XI 




4J 




3 


60 


o 


Vj 


CO 


3 




J3 


in 


C! 


(N 


•H 


-* 


-a 



0) 






as 


<U 






CO in 




r^ 






00 


r-l ^ 


n <f 


o 




r~~ 


3 






3 CO 










t-~ 


!x< 00 




-a- 






C 




vt 


O CM 












r-» 


CO o 


CO 






(U 




<f 


x; cj> 




to 








•o 


CO 


00 




U) 


> 




<r 


i-> r^ 




to 






to 


G 


j-> r~~ 


4J r^ 




to 


<: 




VD 


U 


(U 


X 






to 


O to 


U 


0) 




X 






r^ 


3 


CO 


<a 






X 


o to 


nj 


(1) 




(1) 


CO 






O 0) 


3 


H 






tu 


tu X 


3 w 


^J 0) 




H 


to 






O CO 


o 








H 


CO lU 


Q) n] 


U CO 


r^ 




X 




to 


X 


x: 


•* 








H 


•u X 


CO X 


o 


" 


0) 




to 


>. <u 


*j 


a) 






»» 


1 


CO QJ 


(U 


CM 


T3 


H 


O 


X 


<J H 


>-i 




00 




4J 


•* 


H 


0) H 


f— t 






ro 


Q) 


C 


3 


I— < 


CM 


tu 


to 


(U CO 


x; 


M 




<U 


x: 




H 


3 - 


O 


■H 




to 


tu 


to O 


4J 


XI - 


X 


•H 


w 


X 




O to 


O 


> 


X 


3 


3 


3 O 


3 ni 


■•^ o 


o 


IM 


3 


o 


" 


<LJ -O 




c 


O 


o 




o u 


O --1 


IJ -H 


CQ 


<U 


o 


M 


C 


CO 


>. 


o 


ca 


x: 


01 


x; to 


CO '-^ 


03 Oi 






CO 




o 


X) T3 


u 


u 




■U 


00 


'-' S 


3 






4-J 






0) 


>> >^ 


c 


XI 




1-1 


u 


u 


in u 


O ^ 


O 


U 


r-. 


O 


J 


o o 


3 


XI 


o 


3 


o 


3 C 


o o 


o a) 




•H 


o 




OJ 


r-H ,-( 


O 


(U 




O 


tu 


O to 


r-t u 


OvI Q 


a, 


J 


<!■ 


Pli 


Q 


fa li, 


o 


« 


cu 


o 


C3 


O CO 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 21 



5294 





> 




vO 












ft 


4J 


o 






<J< 


CM 












sr 


r-l W> 


u-l 


u 


cfl 


fn 


OJ 






00 






00 


« r-l 


00 


0) o\ 




U-l 


oo 




lA 


a 








0) C4 


boa\ 


Q) C*^ 


C 


oo 


r^ 




>a- 


•H 








« o 


a 


U lA 


o 


r^ 






O 


T3 


1^ 




j: 


c< 


•H 


u 00 


iJ 




•o 




C^ 


i-l 


00 




9 


CM 


•o c 


w r>. 


a 




(D 00 




r^ 


1-1 


d 




4J 


O CO 


r-l 




3 


m 


O eg 






3 


00 




C3 


1-1 


•H 4J 


j: 


O 


(S 


cd X 






CQ 


!>. 


0) 




*J c 


3 60 


u m 


* 


X 


V 




IS 






> 


* 


C --4 


pa c 


C CD 




0) 


to H 




<a 


a 




•r4 


>. 


0) t>o 


•fl 


-.^ X 


E 


H 


01 




X 


0) 


00 


Vl 


u 


S u 


j2 j3 


S 0) 


CO 






ji 


<u 


•a 


<S 


Q 


1-1 


4J 1-1 


u o 


H 


M 


•» 


O. O 


4J 


H 


o 


X 




O 


K > 


rH CO 


X 




O 


o. -.-< 


sj- 






0) 


1— < 




CD 


CO 3 


4J •> 


£ 


4J 


3 C 




•* 


j: 


H 


CO 


0) 


a. " 


& 


3 CiO 


U 


■•4 


U 


U 


•o 


u 




u 


J^ 


0) "O 


« - 


O Vj 


Vi 


c 


4J 


IS 


u 


h 


* 


•H 


3 


Q C 


CO 


CO 3 


o 


0) 


< C 


CO 


o 


o 


C 


•o 


O 


O 1^ 


J3 


z 


n 


1 < 


U 


u-l 


z 





(U 




SJ 


1-1 D. 


in c 






r>. 




01 




4J 


s 


4J 


mI 


M -H 


^o 


c 


>* C 


CM 


u 


f— 4 


d 




i-H 


CO U 


-* "O 


00 


CO 


^ q 


O 


<u 


t-H 


•r-l 


-* 


(S 


4J -H 


(C o 


— ' w 




w 


^ W 


CT\ 


X 


.-1 


w 


-* 


M 


CO pd 



I 



I-l 




U <U 


(A 


C J3 


^ 


CO 6 


>< 


n 3 


w 


O Z 


H 



O -r^ O 3 (U 



o < <-> ^ 



CD CO 

Q X 



ja 




•r^ 


> 




« 




> 


u 




u 




1-1 


(U 




E3 


M 


O 


CO 


CO 


00 


M 


.-1 




<: 


<J\ 


> 


•d- 




3 



5295 



n in 




n m 


y^ 


O r- 


u 


(N IN 


•H 


1 1 


c 


r^ r- 


•H 


00 00 


1— t 


u-i in 


u 


00 00 




O O 




vD vO 





3 • 
O .u 



•H 


<u 


<n 


n 


c 


u 


cr. 


u-i 


•r-l 


<J 


m 




60 


<: 


u-> 




l-l 






c 


4J -H 


s 




•M 


<u > 


1-1 


C 


CO 


01 


UJ 


•r^ 


C 


U U 




CO 


o 


■M CD 


•» 


c 


o 


M (U 


(U 


o 


0) en 


13 


en 


o 


T-l -l-l 


M 


3 


en 


■^ » 


C - 


o 


•H 


o 


•r-l M 


X 


s 


CO - 


Sd ^1 






S S 


3 


o 




CO 


4J ^ 


CI. 


i-l 


4J Q 


CO to 


3 


o 


(a 


CO c 




> 


<u n 


W -H 


cs 


CO 


S 0) 



01 J£ 
3 ca 



12 -H 
O 

e o 



•v a o -H 





1 

a 


w 




o 


Vi 




2 


i 




m 


p 


a 


o 


U) 


■H 

x: 




o 




o 
/5 


o 


o 

/3 




w 


6 




>J 


<u 


<n 


<u 


?: 


o 


w 




o 


c 




>c 


o 
o 



<4-l 

o 


•o 




u 


(U 


n 


o. 


o 


H 1 







U 


0) 




U 


3 


IH 


<u 


rt 


O 


o 


CO 




u 



5296 



>r,| 



O -H 



Ni 



rol 



-d-l 



4J 




C 




r> 


o 


o 


vO 


f3 


>^ 


< 


(u 



8^ 



s 


S ^ 


o 


•H 




- "^ 


<H 


iM rt 


rj 


S -H 


0] 


■rl 4J 


0) 


w e! 


(0 0) 


VI JJ 


u 


nj Vj 


<U -M 




< 


pi^ o 


O ^-^ 


u 


1+-I 


•H -H 


r-l <U 


w o 


u •^^ 


> fi 


O (U 


ta (u 


O t-l 


M K) 


w 



i; u 



5297 





1 




u 




2: « 












M-l 3 


a. 


M 


•rA 


d 


Xi 


• 


Ifl 





u 


•z. 


<u 




^ 


w 


6 


!-i 


CJ 


m (1) 


2; 


° § 




• 0) 




d 




J3 







IM 


T) 


Vj 


a) <n 


D. 


>% pa 




H 1 





4J 


CO 





3 


<u 


U 14-1 




nj 





u 


u 


C/l ', 


PL. 



H 



vol 



g 

3 ON 
O vO 

6 >^ 





rt 


U) 


<u 


" 


!-i 


(U 


•r-t 


w 


00 





I-l 


1-1 





•H 


•r-4 




^. 


^ 


% 


M 




0) 


fa 





X 


CO 




5 


j-l 




XI 



H 




•H 


00 <u 


r-l 





s 


S •'-1 






>, 


w 


>^ 




4J 


>> C 


IJ 




c 


■u <u 


c 


Ul 


p 


fl j:: 


d 


u 





D <u 





(U 





Vj 





^ 




0. 




!-l 


j: 


f= 


c 





jj 





u 


•3- 


3 


r-l 



-1: n 





1 

C 10 




O Vj 




25 ■« 








'M D 


a 


O w 


r^ 


d 


s: 


• o 


05 


o o 


U 


z 


a) 




J3 


w 


S 


Vl 


a 


H-l O 


>: 


° § 




• w 




o c 




•z. o 




o 



O t3 
CX O 
>» P3 



5298 



>^i 



ool 



001 



^ 2: 



5i3 



(U 


(U 


0) 


c 


B 


a. 


CO 


0) 




u 




•0 


'4^ 





r: 


d 





1 


■U 
r-t 




e 


Vl 


c3 


<u 


rt 


0) 


lU 


Q 


Vj 


fl. 


PC 




60 






-0 





4J 


(!) 


d 


J-c 


d 


> 


tij 


Pi 


ta 


■r-l 





< ^ 

(U 



A< 



5299 





1 

c: 


M 




o 


Vj 




'^ 






>« 


3 


D. 


o 




•H 

x: 




o 


in 


o 


o 


U 


ss 




XI 




0) 


p. 




H 


<1) 


<4-l 


0) 


S 


o 


Irt 




o 


c 




z 


o 
o 



O <3 
D. O 
>> pq 
H 



-•I 



a 

o xO 



oo| 



col 



ool 



oo| 



oo| 



col 



oo| 



oo| 



oo| 



> 


CO 


> 


to 


u 


u 


u 


u 


<a 


a 


<Si 


c 


w 


<u 


CO 


<u 




T3 




•o 


ji 


a 


ji 


c 


u 


(0 


u 


(U 


t-i 


a, 


I-l 


a 


CI) 


(U 


rt 


<u 


(U 


o 


<u 


a 


a 




K 






-0 




-a 


(U 


c 


0) 


C 


> 


to 


> 


CO 


•iH 




•r-l 




W 


CO 


(0 


CO 


C 


4J 


C 


u 


(U 


a 


O 


C 


x: 


C9 


x: 


ns 


(U 


^ 


<u 


M 


u 


M 


Vj 


60 


o. 


•r-l 


o. 


•H 


s 


2 


s 


s 



■-I a 


r-l 


a. 


i-H 


00 


I-I 


00 


I-I 


00 


I-I 00 


a 01 


to 


<u 


tU 


•H 


ta 


•H 


OJ 


•rl 


CO •r^ 


(U Q 


<u 


Q 


<u 


S 


(U 


S 


(1) 


S 


<U S 


a: 


X 




w 




X 




K 




^ . 


T3 




■o 




i-i 




I-I 




I-I 


1-1 


dj c 


<u 


a 


<u 


t« 


<a 


trj 


4) 


rt 


(U cd 


> t« 


> 


tfl 


> 


i-i 


> 


S-l 


> 


^ 


> b! 


•H 


•H 




■H 


3 


-H 


3 


•1-1 


3 


•H 3 


to to 


to 


to 


to 


4J 


to 


4J 


to 


4J 


to 4J 


C! 4J 


a 


4J 


C 


1-1 


d 


r-^ 


C 


I-I 


C ■-" 


<U C 


<u 


a 


<u 


3 


0) 


3 


(U 


3 


tU 3 


j2 ta 


j:: 


nj 


x: 


o 


x; 


O 


J2 


o 


-C o 


<U l-l 


0) 


Vj 


0) 


•H 


(U 


•H 


<u 


■H 


(U •H 


U 00 


^j 


tlO 


(J 


u 


^1 


IJ 


Vj 


(J 


Vj h 


O. -H 


o. 


■^^ 


D. 


OO 


ex 


00 


a 


00 


a OO 


i 2 


s 


S 


G 


< 


a 


< 


E 


<: 


e <: 



ti 




o 


4J 


•r^ 


c 


4J 




t) 


^ 


•1-1 


o 


>*-i 


t« 


•H 


4J 


to 


tJ 


to 


< 



-<l<: 





CO 




u 


"4-1 


o 


O 






U) 


o 


c 


5S 


o 




CJ 



a 13 
o. o 
>» pa 



5300 



"O 


r^ 


<0 


>* 


u 


(x< 


<s 




bO 




•H 




t-l 




^ 




o 




4J 




§ 


ox 


O 


vO 


e 


>< 


< 


fa 



fc 


<u 




s 


4-1 


o 


a 


sc 


« 




M 


M-l 


OO 


O 



•ri 




■i-i 




a) in 


S 




s 




CJ <u 

•H -t-l 


(J 




OT 




> ■-< 


0) 




•H 




M -rl 


o 




O 




<U G 


u 


<u 


G 


4J 


CO lU 


<u 


CJ 


■r^ 


o 


fi, 


S 


•r-( 


I-I 


(U 


-C 




> 


rH 




4J -O 


•^ 


M 


I-I 


o 


r-i a 


•a 


<U 




M 


ea (iJ 


c 


CO 


" 


P^ 


OJ 


ci 




C 




X tn 


i-i 


s: 


o 


Xi 


M 


Ul 


u 


4-1 


u 


13 CU 


t-l 


i-H 


CO 


t-l 


0) X 




ta 


(U 


d 


4J H 


^ 


<u 


D. 


0) 


■H 


o 


X 


O 


X 


e 3 



w <; 



^l<: 



5301 





a 


tn 




O 


^j 




z 






in 


3 


D. 


O 


to 


r-l 

j3 







w 


o 





!-i 


2; 




as 






a 




u 


QJ 


m 


0) 


s: 





w 







C 




2 







(U C3 
D. O 
>% pq 



-^1 



\ 



£ E 











>^ 


in 




t-j 


u 


M 


CO 
C3 


m 


§ 


a) 


Ul 


<u 








C 


u 





•r^ 


t« 


•H 




> 


S^ 


> 


(U 


n 




M 


4J 


0) 


r! 


<U 


■u 



M 


nJ 


(U 


fu 







•H 


nJ 


> 





^J 


J3 


0) 


OJ 


CO 


0. 




•H 


J3 


60 


4J 


C 



S3 

Is 



< K 
Hi 



0) r} 
Q. O 

H 



-I 



5302 



.a 




o 




u 




§ 


ON 


o 


vO 


S 


>< 


< 


p:^ 



^1 





@ 


u 


;3 


X) 


>- 


t= 


&s 


3 


^ 



(0 > 

0) U 



^ 4J 




(A 


O O 




• 3 


•r4 (U 




J3 


H "-1 


S« 


« 



•o u 



5303 





1 


Ul 




o 


^J 




?5 


(1) 
S 




>4-l 


3 


a 


O 




■^ 




o 


UJ 


o 


o 


u 


2: 




J3 




0) 


6 




^J 


OJ 


m 


CJ 


s: 


o 






o 


C 




» 


o 

CJ 



D. O 
>-. PQ 



'^l 



o?| 



u 




a 




3 CJN| 




vO 


g 


►< 


< 


b 



>> 


t> 


tt 


cd 


(O 


l-H 




l-l 


n 


0) 


3 


JQ 


§ 


01 



<U 


nj 


^ 


.-1 


0) 


3 


l-l 


o. 


a 


o 


6 


(U 



^ ^ 



i-H 4J ^J 3 



H 


ti 


ctf 


0) « 


P^ 


X -a 



CO g 



CO nS 



CO 



■'\< 



5304 



CTNl 



o. o 
?~. pq 







4J 


0) 




O 


3 




0) 


u 


m 




nl 


o 


o 




• 


u 



-■I 



iJ 




c 




:3 


<7\ 


o 


vO 


E3 


>^ 


< 


fo 



>-l 


>» 


to 


(!) 


o 


i-l 


u 


n^ 


a. 


(3 




> 


J3 




u 


V 


.-( 


a 


nj 


o 


(U 


U 


K 


to 



s ^ 



3J 



.d u 



(U 



<i<: 



5305 



<u « 
o. o 
>. pa 



-Hi 



u 


!-i 


u 


u 


.il 


o 


O 


o 


a 


w 


CO 


m 


o 




•l-l 


•H 


•H 


PQ 


^ 


> 


> 


> 




ij 


•a 


•a 


T3 


O 


1— I 


<C 


<: 


<: 


g; 














<D 


<u 


(U 


9 




> 


> 


> 


H 




•rA 


•■-4 


•rl 


et 




U 


■U 


4-1 


•r4 




O 


o 


o 


X 




< 


<; 


<J 


a 



oi\ 



cnI 






o vo 



s 

! 



j:: 




4-1 


i-< 


1-1 




nj 


tn 


(1) 


4J 


M 


o 




•r-( 


4J 


>-l 


a 


4J 


nj 


w 






tA u 
m «J 

:-« 

-4 « 

u « 

I 

I 

M 

•I 

S3 

is 

o o 

<1 o 

U >M 
4J 

<: n 
« .2 



5306 



a. o 



4J 




d 




a 


a\ 


o 


vO 


H 


>- 


< 


fu 



cvjI 



5) ^j 



•M o 

3 






o (C 



(0 > 



<]< 



5307 





I 




O !-i 




2; g 








u-i 3 


o. 


O m 


r< 


CT 


x; 


• O 




o o 


1-1 


2: 


0) 




J3 


0) 


e 


^J 


o 


M-l (U 


?-: 


° M 




• « 




o a 




z o 




CJ 



0) a 
o. o 



'-'I 



fl) >< 



3 o^ 

o vO 

<5 |il 



S 



c^l 



01 u 
U fU 

3 



t-l <u -u 



4J U <U 



^i<i: 



a (3 
o. o 

>> PQ 



u 




a 




3 


a^ 


o 


vO 


s 


>* 


< 


ft, 



vol 



5308 



CMl 



O M 






O 4J 

■rH O 

'M nj 

ui <; 

i-l 0) 

O 0) 



T3 CI 



M 00 3 

a, T-i o 
g 2: w 
o 
o 



S G 



r-<|-i; 



5309 





1 

c: 


t/1 







u 




2S 


s 




y-i 


D 


D. 





w 


■^ 







« 








U 


2; 




0) 
J3 




w 


6 




ij 


41 


<4-l 


<u 


5: 





05 







d 




■pz 




CJ 



0) K! 

a. o 

f»% pq 
H 



-^1 



t3 r- 



4J 




c 




a 


0^ 





vo 


s 


>! 


< 


li. 



^ .i: 



s S 



>, 


cn 


60 


M 


00 


5: 




H 


H, 


u 


tij 


•M 


•H 


•M 






M 


M 


c 


X 


2; 


2 


X 


t>. 




•■-< 


•rl 


3 


<u 








*J 




S 


S 





H 


>^ 


f>^ 


>» 


a 













4J 


4J 


u 


3 




>. 


>» 




p! 


c 




a 







4J 


4J 


XI 


)-i 


3 


3 


3 


u 




a 


d 


Xi 


(U 















3 


3 


CJ 0) 


JJ 











to 


4J 








13 


M 








^ 











1 -H 


0) 


^ 


d 


c 


i-H 


OJ 






> 


:s 


CJ 


3 





0) 


•t~l 


nj 


>» 


•0 W 


S 








u 


:s 





u 


x> 


1) 0) 


u 


XI 


x: 


(U 




M 


n) 


CO 


Vj C/3 


3 


XI 


T-H 


s 


s. 


fl< 


a. 






CO <a; 



4J <U 

d *J 

0) o 



x: 
to o 



^l-JJ 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 22 



5310 





1 

c 


U) 




o 


Vj 




£5 


^ 




M-l 


3 


ex 


O 


g 


0) 


O 


t) 


u 


•^, 




0) 




10 


p. 




U 


CJ 


U-( 


0) 


?: 


O 


0) 




o 


d 




z 


o 



o 


T1 




Vj 


<u 


C3 


o. 


O 


H 1 



•o 


r^ 


0) 


> 


4J 


t^ 


4 




bO 




•rl 




t-l 




^ 




o 




a 




n 


0^ 


o 


vr 


Fl 


>< 


< 


l^ 



^1 



CMl 





H 




Z 




o 




u 


o 


CO 


R 


^ 


3 


w 


y< 


H 



§ ^ 



J3 


x: 


4J 


4-1 


d) 


i-l 


<X 


tit 


U) 


(U 


•o 


K 



XI 4J 


XI 




u o 


£ 




(1) 0) 

> •'-1 


5 




o 


1 




•;;;ii 


3 




> 


(1) 


4J 


1 x: 


•i-i 


O 


O *J 


'U 


<U 


•H i-t 


<1) 




a: (fl 


I-t 


O 


r-l X 


4J 


i 


(U 


•iH 




o 


h-1 





r! s 



•H 4J 



o x 
o 

4J 

P^ bo 

5S 



^ w 



o 
<u xi 



hK 





1 




o ^ 




'^ aj 








IM 3 


a. 


O m 


H 


C 


£i 


• 


m 


o o 


!-i 


Ji 


<U 




J3 


U) 


a 


^ 


OJ 


M-l (U 


^ 


° § 




• 01 




o a 




•z. o 




CJ 



"4-1 

o 


-d 




>-i 


<1) 


o 


o. 


(1 


!>»«l 


H 


1 





u 


01 


o 


3 


<u 


4J m 




m o 


o 


4-1 


n 


CO •• 


PM 



-ll 



5311 . 



*J 




^ 


CT\ 


o 


O 


fi 


>-' 


< 


(!< 



S •'-1 
1-1 o 
oj J-i 



3J 



01 <j; 



> C 



^l<: 



5312 





U) 




u 


'U 


0) 


o 






m 


o 


C 


•^ 


O 




O 





T5 




^J 


<U 


ta 


D. 


o 


>MM| 


H 


1 





u 




o 




01 


IM 




o 


o 




^ 



•"•I 






^1 



4J 




r: 




D 


ON 


o 


<.o 


f; 


>■ 


< 


u. 



w 

u 
m o 

■rl o 

a ■'-' 

•H o 

bO U 
u (u 






^ u 



< u 



0) fiJ 
G. O 



« 




C3 




3 


CTv 


O 


VO 


S 


>< 


< 


r^ 



5313 



5314 



Attachment I - TABLE B 



y CIASSIFICATION OF ORGANIZATION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 
IN MIGRANT HEALTH PROJECTS 



In order to facilitate the description of services provided by the 
projects, the following classifications were designed. It must be noted, 
however, that these classifications are not all inclusive. The desig- 
nated codes shown for each project should be interpreted as being gen - 
erally reflective of services provided and not as a precise measurement 
of all the specific services offered. 



Classification 

Code of Services Description 

A Full Time Comprehensive Health Services ; 

A comprehensive range of diagnostic, therapeutic, 
and follow-up medical services offered by the 
project on a daily and year round basis by full- 
time medical staff in a center setting. Provisions 
for dental care, health counseling and outreach 
services, as well as adequate provisions for pre- 
ventive services are offered either inside or 
outside the center. 



Scheduled Comprehensive Health Services : 

A scope of medical services similar to those listed 
above are offered by the project, but through, 
intermittently scheduled clinics (e.g. one or two 
times a week at two or three hours per session.) 
In general, these clinic sessions are backed by 
referrals of patients by nurses and outreach 
workers to local physicians on a fee-for-service 
basis at times when clinics are not in session. 
Provisions are also made for caring for other 
health needs such as dental care, health counsel- 
ing, and outreach services in addition to preven- 
tive services. Environmental health activities 
are an element of the project. 



5315 



Scheduled Medical Services ; 

Although the project offers complete diagnostic, thera- 
peutic and follow-up medical services through intermit- 
tantly scheduled clinics with referral to private physi- 
cians during non-clinic hours, provisions are not 
necessarily made to offer dental care services, and other 
health services mentioned above. Environmental health 
activities are an element of the project. 



Scheduled Categorical Health Services : 

The project focuses upon clinics for specific diseases or 
categorical emphasis (e.g. Tuberculosis Control, Venereal 
Disease Control, Maternal and Child Health, immunization, 
etc.) and does not offer a broad range of medical services 
in a clinic setting. General health care is provided 
through referral by nurses and outreach workers to private 
physicians and dentists on a fee-for-service basis. Camp 
sanitation inspections, and efforts to correct deficiencies 
may be a component of the project. 



Non-scheduled Health Services ; 

All general health care is provided by the project through 
a fee-for-service referral system to private physicians, 
and, in some instances, to private dentists. Nursing 
services provided are primarily outreach and follow-up. 
Camp sanitation inspections, and efforts to correct defi- 
ciencies may be a component of the project. 



Limited Categorical Services : 

The project has a specific objective, usually limited to 
environmental health services only, and is not directed 
to the provision of direct general health care. Environ- 
mental health activities usually involve camp inspections, 
enforcement of state codes, and coordinating efforts with 
other local sanitation programs. 



Administrative-Consultative Services : 

The project does little, if any, in the way of providing 
direct health care and devotes its efforts to consulting 
and coordinating the direct health care activities of 
other groups . 



5316 



Attachment 11 - TABLE B 



FOOTNOTES 

\/ See Attachment 1 - Classification of Organization and Scope of 
Services in Migrant Health Projects. 

2/ Amount shown constitutes supplemental funds only and does not 

rep'-esent full amount of funds available for project operations. 

3/ State-level coordination project (classification G) provides 
direct services (classification F) in two counties. 

4/ State-level coordination project (classification G) which 

sub-contracts with 12 county health departments and one local 
hospital to provide direct health services. Classif icatiqn of 
services in the county-level operations are as follows: 

Butte County Health Department C 

Colusa County Health Department D 

Fresno County Health Department C 

Kern County Health Department F 

Merced County Health Department C 

Riverside County Health Department D 

San Joaquin District Health Department F 

San Luis Obispo County Health Department C 

Santa Barbara County Health Department D 

Santa Cruz County Health Department C 

Sutter County Hospital B 

Sutter- Yuba District Health Department F 

Yolo County Health Department ^ 

5/ State Advisory Board now being reconstituted to include elected 
majority of consumers. 

6/ State-level coordination project (classification G) provides direct 
services of classifications D, E, and F in several counties in the 
State. 

I 

7/ A project headquartered in the District of Columbia will operate on 
the East Coast migrant stream to supplement existing project serx'ices 
concentrating primarily on continuity of care from one project area 
to another. 

8/ State-level coordination project (classification G) which formerl y 
sub-contracted with 10 county health departments to provide direct 
health services. In FY 1970 each of these county level projects were 
awarded separate grants. 

^ Additional consumers to form a majority will be elected. 



5317 



Paee 2 - Attachment II - TABLE B 



10 / Amount shown does not represent full amount of funds available for 
FY 1970. Unexpended funds from previous year were applied as a 
carry-over balance to support approved activities. 

11 / No funds were awarded in FY 1969. Unexpended funds awarded in 
FY 1968 were used as a carry-over balance to support services 
in FY 1969. 

12 ^ A State Advisory Board is being developed five county- level programs 
have established, however, their own advisory committees with 
consumer representation. 

13 / Governor's Committee on Migrant Affairs with consumer representative 
advises the State project. 




5318 



H}tniieb ^laie» ^etiaie 



Washin<zton. O.C. ZOStO 



ON APRIL 20, 1970, SENATOR MONDALE SENT THE FOLLOWING LETTER TO THE SECRETARIES 
OF AGRICULTURE, LABOR, COMMERCE, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH, EDUCA- 
TION AKD WELFARE, AND TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY: 



Dear Mr. 

As Chairman of the Senate Subcoonittee on Migratory Labor, I have on 
several occasions visited in the Lover Rio Grande Valley of Texas. It 
is absolutely shocking to view firsthand the poverty suffered by migrant 
and seasonal famvorkers living there, and particularly the lack of drinking 
water, sewage disposal, and sanitation facilities. The severity of the 
situation is best found in a recent letter I received from Reynaldo De La 
Cruz, President of Colonias del Valle. He sayti : 

"The situation is rapidly becoming %K)rse. The lack of good 
water in many of the colonias is reaching a critical stage. A 
recent check of 8 water samples from several colonias in the Valley 
showed coliform organisms present in 6 of them. Many persons are 
taking their drinking from irrigation ditches. This %wter comes 
from the Rio Grande River, which is a 1,400 mile sewer. 

The people in che Valley are restless. They see the Anglo 
farmers with plenty of water secured through Farmers' Rome Admin- 
istration loans, which they are unable to get. They are told the 
City of McAllen gets over $.5 million to extend water and sewer 
lines into an industrial park. Where are the resources to build 
good water systems for these colonias? Dvie to the gravity of the 
situation we request this information be given to us as soon as 
humanly possible." 

In view of the gravity and seriousness of this problem, I would be moat 
grateful if you could send to me Just as soon us possible a compilation of 
resources available through your Department's prograiss that might possibly 
be obtained for this area. If you have any questions regarding this matter, 
please contact Mr. Boren Chertkov, Counsel to che Subconnlttee, Room 252 Old 
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510; phone: 225-4538. 

Your immediate attention to this matter is deeply appreciated. 

With warmest personal regards. 

Sincerely, 

Walter F. Mondale, Chairman 
Subconnlttee on Migratory Labor 



5319 






V 



^ •) 



0^ 



') "> <-.■ ■ - DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

" "* ^ OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

WASHINGTON. D. C. 20250 



May 8 1970 



Honorable Walter F. Mondale 

Chairman, Subconmittee on Migratory Labor 

Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 

United States Senate 

Washington, D. G. 



Dear Senator Mondale: 

This is in reply to your letter of ipril 20 concerning 
the lack of good water in certedn colonias in the lower 
Rio Grande River Valley. You requested that we furnish 
you with information concerning any program we administer 
which could assist the people of this area to obtain good 
potable water. 

The Farmers Home Administration of this Department is 
authorized by Public Law 89-2^0 to provide Federal loan 
and grant assistance for the development of imral water 
systems and waste disposal systems. Eligibility for this 
assistance is limited to public or quasi-public bodies 
and corporations not operated for profit which serve 
residents of open country and rureil towns and villages of 
not more than 5,500 population. We are enclosing a 
pamphlet which briefly describes this program. 



Sincerely, 

2 O--/^ 




Aljred L. Edwards 

Deputy Assistant S^retarf 



Enclosure 



5320 

U S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

off:ce of The secretary 

washington 



i,\!\i i; 1970 



Honorable Walter F. Mondale 

Chaimian, Subcommit Ct e on Migratory Labor 

CommiLLee on Labor jr. J Public Welfare 

United States Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20510 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

I wish to acknowltd>;c' yt-ur letter of April 20 in which you asked if 
the Department of L<>bor administered any programs which might be of 
use in helping to provide water and sewage facilities in the colonias 
of the Lower Rio Grande Valley. I have taken this long to reply 
because I wanted this question to be given the closest attention in 
the Department. 

After close consultation with all appropriate departments I must 
report that the Department of Labor has no programs directly appli- 
cable to the water aid sewage needs you described. 

The Department's M.inpower Administration, however, has classified 
the three counties visually considered as comprising the lower Rio 
Grande Valley (Cameron, Starr and Willacy) as areas of persistent 
unemployment. This classification makes the area eligible for many 
kinds of assistance, including grants and loans for water and sewage 
installations. These programs are administered by the Economic 
Development Administ r i r ion in the Department of Commerce. I am 
informed that Hidalgc County is included with the other three as one 
Economic Development District. 

Applications for assistance under this program are first reviewed by 
the Lower Rio Grande Valley Economic Development Council, a community- 
sponsored organization. 



5321 



Other possible sources of assistance are the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development (the Community Facilities Administration), 
the Department of Agriculture (Farmers Horn Aininis trar i on) , and 
The Department of Henlth, Education and Welfare (Migr..nt Health 
Division of the Public Health Service), 

I hope this reply wi'l be of assistance to you. 

Sincerely yours. 



Secretary of Labor 



5322 




THE SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20410 



MAY 1 2 1970 

Honorable Walter F. Mondale 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 

Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 

United States Senate 

Washington, D. C. :X)510 

Dear Senator Mondale: 

Thank you for your recent letter regarding Psderal prof^-ams that might be 
of assistance in financing the construction of water aiid sewer facilities 
for migratory labor conmunities in the lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. 

A member of ray staff has discussed this matter with Mr. Boren Chertkov. 
As we understand It, ';hese communities are unincorporated areas, generally 
located near incorporated municipalities that range from small rural 
towns to moderately large cities. It is our further understanding that 
preliminary information suggests that many or perhaps all of the nei^bor- 
ing municipalities would have little or no interest in assuming the 
obligations of providing the needed water and sewer facilities for the 
migratory labor communities. 

Although the foregoing facts somewhat limit our opportunities to be of 
help, it would appear that there is at least some possibility that our 
Water and Sewer Fa'-ilities Grant Program and our Public Pacility Loans 
Program might be of some assistance on this problem where the mlgrato]*y 
labor camps are adjacent to urban municipalities. I am enclosing fact 
sheets on these grant and loan programs and we will be glad to arrange to 
have our Fort Worth Regional Office participate in a field review with 
representatives of your Subcommittee or with representatives of the 
migratory farm workers to determine the extent to which our programs can 
assist. 

In the case of those communities located in rural areas, assistance 
would be under the jurisdiction of the F>armer8 Home Administration. It 
is ray understanding that you have been in touch with that agency to get 
information on their water and sewer programs. 

Please be assured of our interest in being of all possible help In this 
matter. 




Enclosures 



5323 




DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION. AND WELFARE 

WASHINGTON. D C 20201 



SURGEON GENERAL 

OF THE 

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE 



JUN181970 



Honorable Walter F. Mondale 
United States Senate 
Washington, D. C. 20510 

Dear Senator Mondale: 

This is in further reply to your April 20 letter to 
Secretary Finch in which you requested information about 
resources in this Department for inproving environmentcil 
conditions of migrants and seasonal farm workers in the 
lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. Your correspondent, 
Mr. De La Cruz, President of Colonias del Valle, is 
especially concerned with resources to build water systems 
for the Colonias in the area. 

In this Department no agency other than the Indian Health 
Service is authorized to expend funds for water system 
construction in rural areas, and that Service's authority 
is limited to such construction on Indian reservations. 
Migrant Health Program grant funds, for example, are not 
availcible for the construction of samitary facilities in 
migrant areas. 

I deeply regret naving to give you this negative response 
to your inquiry. 



Sincerely yourS^ 



■»>tlnj 




5324 




THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE 

WASHINGTON. D C 20230 



JUN 2 1970 

Honorable Walter F. Mondale 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 

Committee on Labor and Public Welfare 

United States Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20510 

Dear Senator Mondale : ' 

This is in further response to your letter of April 20 
concerning the deplorable living conditions of the 
migrant and seasonal farm workers of the lower Rio 
Grande Valley of Texas, and requesting a compilation 
of resources available through this Department's 
programs that might possibly be obtained for the area, 
particularly with respect to the lack of drinking water, 
sewage disposal and sanitation facilities. 

The only program within the Department of Commerce 
under which these workers might be eligible for assis- 
tance would be the Public Works Program of the Economic 
Development Administration. It is possible that EDA 
could offer assistance under Section 101 of the Public 
Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, which 
authorizes direct grants in designated redevelopment 
areas if "(A) the project for which financial assis- 
tance is sought will directly or indirectly (i) tend 
to improve the opportunities, in the area where such 
project is or will be located, for the successful 
establishment or expansion of industrial or commercial 
plants or facilities, (ii) otherwise assist in the 
creation of additional long-term employment opportu- 
nities for such area, or (iii) primarily benefit the 
long-term unemployed and members of low-income families 
or otherwise substantially further the objectives of 
the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964." 



5325 



We should point out to you, however, that the area where 
the project is to be located must: meet certain specified 
criteria of high unemplo3rment or low family income. The 
determinatior of such eligibility is made on the basis 
of data unifcirmly available throughout the country such 
as census data or data supplied by the Department of 
Labor. It Is not possible at this writing to determine 
if the area in question is eligible, as wo would need 
to know the specific county or couties involved. Eligible 
counties within the lower Rio Grande Valley are: Cameron, 
Dimmit, Frio, Goliad, Gonzales, Karnes, Kinnny, La Salle, 
Maverick, Medina, Real, Starr, Uvalde, Val Verde, Webb, 
Willacy, Wilson, Zapata and Zavala. 

EDA's Director of the Southwest Area Office, Mr. Millard K. 
Neptune, would b«» pleased to give any possible help to 
this group in an effort to determine whether they could 
qualify for EDA assistance or whether another agency might 
be better suited to assist them in their needs. If 
Mr. De La Cruz will communicate with Mr. Neptune at 
702 Colorado Street, Austin, Texas 78701, he will be glad 
to arrange a meeting at a mutually convenient time. 



Sincerely, 




Secretary of Commerce 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A 



5326 



\ !i** EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 

OFFICF OF ECONOMIC Washington, o.c. 20SO6 



OPPORTUNITY 



MIY 1 1 1970 

Honorable Walter F. Mondale 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 

United States Senate 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Mr. Rumsfeld has asked me to respond to your letter of April 20 
regarding migrant and seasonal farmworkers living in the lower 
Rio Grande Valley of Texas. 

The Office of Economic Opportunity has no funds available at 
this time for this kind of sewage and water works project. It 
is our understanding, however, that the Farmers Home Admini8tra> 
tion is empowered by 7 USCA Sec. 1926 (a) (4) (B) to furnish 
loan and grant funds for construction of individual private 
water systems (consisting of a well, submersible pump, and 
storage tank). Under this provision, migrant workers could 
establish an organization to receive FmHA loan and grant funds 
for the purpose of constructing individual or community water 
facilities or both. 

Your office may wish to contact the Fanners Home Administration 
for further details. 

I hope this information is helpful to you. If we can be of any 
further assistance, please let us know. 



Sincerely, 




^rank Carlucci 
Assistant Director 
for Operations 



5327 



TESTDCNY PRESENTED 



BY 



MEGEANT LEGAL PCFlOti PRDGRAM 
WRSHINSrCN, D.C. 



BEFORE 



U.S. SENATE SUBCXMUnEE 
CN MIGRATORY LABOR 



AUGUST, 1970 



5328 



SECTiasi I 

IMTCDUCTICN 

The following testimony is presented to the Si±Kxrnmittee by 
the Migrant Legal Action Program, a legal service arm of United 
Migrants for Opportunity, Inc. In preparation of this testimony 
VAe have had the assistance of Colorado Rural Legal Services, Idaho 
Legal Aid and the Migrant Research Project. 

Ihe hearings recently held by the Subcoimittee have elicited 
much compelling testimony, and an N.B.C. documentary has graphically 
described the plight of the migrant faritworker in Texas and Florida. 
Vfe have once again learned details of the horrible inadequacies in 
the availability of food, housing, and health care. Vfe have learned 
that despite the federal government's programs designed to meet 
these most basic of needs, despite increased funding levels and 
administrative changes for these programs, the human suffering 
continues imchanged. 

This is indeed a paradox, and this paradox raises fimdamental 
questions relating to the wisdom and the efficiency of the system 
of cooperative federalism upon vAiich these programs are premised. 

The following testurony pinpoints three basic questions vAiich 
must be ej^lored in detail if effective solutions are to be reached. 



-1- 



5329 



1. HOW ARE THESE PKXJRAMS ADMINISTKRhD iO" THE NATIONAL AND 
LOCAL LEVEI£? 



Tte federal govermtent is vested with the responsibility for 
the administration of nijirierous programs v*d.ch were enacted and 
funded to inprove the lives of poor persons. In administering 
these programs, and in accounting for the hundreds of billions of 
dollars of public funds allocated to them for this purpose, the 
federal govemnent has an affirmative responsibility to insure 
these programs reach all categories of persons viho shoiild be served. 
It has an obligation to determine the characteristics of the in- 
tended beneficiaries and take positive steps to reach all persons 
within the class to the fiiLl extent of the resources allocated. 
Moreover, it must reach all segments within the class and not 
merely those nost convenient to serve. It has additional public 
responsibility to evaluate these programs, ascertain v^ere intended 
beneficiaries are not being reached, and rectify the situation, as 
soon as the need is apparent. 

Migrant fantworkers as a group and as individuals are systematically 
excluded fron the benefits of almost all major federal programs serving 
poor people generally. These programs are not administered in such 
a way as to encourage or even permit migrant participation, and in 
many instances regulations and instructions are promulgated vAiich 
actually iitpede migrant participation. 



-2- 



5330 



2. WOr APEN'T THESE FEDERAL PROGRAMS HE^EFITING THE MIGRANTS? 

Despite clear and Icjng-standing recognition of these problems; 
despite the desperate need of these powerless pecple vAkj have no 
way of bringing their starvation, illnesses, honelessness , and 
joblessness to public attention; despite the availability of govem- 
inent money and programs to meet their needs, no positive actions 
have been taken to administer these programs in ways that will 
benefit the migrant population. 

Bureaucratic inaction of the sort detailed below under 
circumstances \^Tere: (a) public monies have beai allocated for 
these purposes, (b) a clear and continuing situation of need has 
been shown, and (c) no effective action has been taken by the 
persons in charge of administering the programs rises to a level 
of nonfeasance and possibly even malfeasance. 

Monies are being distributed in ways that clearly exclude a 
substantial and definable segment of the population intended to be 
benefitted by the programs, and the aid that these programs provide 
to those few vAio do receive benefits is so substantially belcw 
standards of adequacy as to be outrageous. 

3. WHAT IS GOVEFNMENT AT ALL LEVELS DOING ABOUT THE FAILURES OF 
THESE PROGRAMS? 

As has been pointed out repeatedly, but must be emphasized 

again, the federal agencies administering programs to benefit migrants 

have abdicated responsibility. Althou^ aware of the ineffectiveness 

of these programs, most of the administering agencies have chosen to 

do nothing to irtprove them. 

-3- 



5331 



Those major departnents that we have studied adnit that they 
lack accurate general statistics on the programs which they administer, 
and readily concede that they lack the specific statistics to 
determine migrant needs and participation. Prior hearings and sdb- 
ccitndttee interrogatories have elicited facts showing that these 
agencies fund state and local officials without establishing priorities, 
guidelines or standards to v^iich local officials must adhere if they 
wish to continue to receive funds. These hearings and interrogatories 
have also shown that these same agencies then use their lack of data 
to excuse themselves fron any type of remedial action. 

The federal benefits programs v^ have studied have no mechanisms 
for evaluating the effectiveness of the local administration of the 
program. Once a program is instituted or finds are granted to a 
locality, the funds create a vested interest in that locality. No 
matter how badly administered a program is, the local beneficiaries 
fight for the program's continued existence, vAiile resisting program 
changes designed to inprove its effectiveness. Despite the many 
alternatives c^en to the federal government to review the administration 
of these programs — from encouraging responsive administration to 
cutting off funds — this type of review is seldom made, and positive 
action almost never occurs. 

The testimony presented herein concentrates on three government 
departments v*iose activities both directly and indirectly lead to 
continued exploitation of the migrant, and continuation of his eoonoroic 



-4- 



5332 



and political pcwerlessness . 

All of the ac±ivities at the very least constitute ocntinuing 
nonfeasance — failure to use pcMer and funds to protect intended 
beneficiaries of goveminent prograins. In the case of the Department 
of Labor the active alliance of departnent representatives with 
agribusiness agents to circumvent the Wagner-Peyser and Crew Leader 
Registration Arts — as well as the continuing refusal of the 
Department of Labor to construe these Acts to cover the persons 
directly responsible for the exploitation — cctnes close to govemment 
ocrplicity . 



-5- 



5333 



SECriCN II 

GOVERN^^ENT FACILITATICN OF PRIVME EXPLOITATICN 
IHHXJGH THE DEPARIMENr CF LABOR 



Ihe Project en Corporate Responsibility told the Ccromittee hew 
Coca Cola, Alico, Teneco, and other major corporations either 
directly or throu^ their corporate infrastructures own or operate 
farms that pay famwDrkers substandard wages and force them to 
work under subhuman conditions. An even more pervasive source of 
migrant ejqiloitatian can be foxjnd by investigating the unspdcen 
alliance between the food processors and the U.S. Department of Labor. 
A highly sopiiisticated system has been set up, with due regard to 
all procedural technicalities. The key element of this system is 
the Department of Labor's continued refiosal to enforce its regulations 
against corporate exploiters. 

The U.S. Departmsnt of Labor has responsibility for operating a 
system of interstate recruitment of fantworkers,!/ insuring that no 
f amworker is recrmted throu^ the interstate system to vrork on a 
farm that has substandard housing 2/ and registering and si^ervising 
crew leaders vtio operate in interstate ccninerce.3/ 



1/ The Wagner-Peyser Act, 28 USC 48 et seg.. , v*iich established 

the U.S. Enployment and Training Service (USTES) . 

2/ 20 Code of Federal Regulations 602.9 (1968); Gomez v. Florida 

State Enployment Services , 417 F 2d 569 (1969) . 

Zj Contractor Itegistraticn Act, 7 USC 2041-5S 29CFR 40. 



-6- 



5334 

These regulations are being systanaticcilly violated in the fblloang 
ways: 

First ; The U.S. Department of Labor has abdicated its regulatory 
duties to enforce the Wagner-Peyser and Crew lecider 
Registraticxi Acts against corporate violators. 

Second : The food processors have instituted a system under vihidi 
they act in direct contravention of the regulations in 
collaboration with local growers and with state enploiTjnent 
agencies v*io receive federal funding. 

Third ; The U.S. Etepartment of Labor aids and abets them in these 
cctions by an unreasonably narrow construction of their 
powers, under vrtiich they steadfastly refvise to take 
appropriate action against corporate violators. 

Fourth : The U.S. Depa r tm en t of Labor further aids and abets such 
actions by continuing to fund State USTES Offices that 
cooperate and collaborate in these activities vdiich are 
specifically designed to sxisvert the intent and purpose 
of these Acts. 

Because prior testimony has concentrated on Florida and Texas, vs 
have chosen our exanples frcm the midwest and far west. These are merely 
ill\astrative of a nationwide pattern of ejtploitation carried on by 
growers and processors across the country. 

-7- 



5335 



EXAMPLE #1 

All of the sugar beet growers in Western Idaho and Eastern Oregon 
have output contracts with Aralgamated Sugar. Artalgamated unilaterally 
determines the artount of sugar beets they will purchase in a given year. 
The fanners grow only that amount, all of vAiich is purchased by 
Amalgamated Sugar. 

Amalgamated Sugar handles all of the recruiting for the farmers 
with v*iich it has output contracts. It hires and pays the salary of 
a recruiter, Carlos Martinez. This nan is a direct enployee of 
Amalgamated and operates the Amalgamated Labor Agency in the Rio 
Grande Valley. Amalgamated ' s recruiter, in tvim, provides the crestf 
leaders money to transport themselves and the recruited migrants to_ 
the farms. 

Uhtil \^/fo years ago. Amalgamated recruited through the Texas 
Ertployment Ccitmissian (TEC) . At the time Gorrez was decided, they 
ceased using the TEC offices, openly admitting they were doing so to 
avoid having to catply with the housing regulations. 

The camps to vAiich the migrants are transported are not operated 
by Attalgamated Sugar Ccttpany. They are instead run by farmers' 
cooperative associations. In fact, there generally is very little 
participation or financial backing by Amalgamated, other than the 
aforementioned output contracts and recruiting help. The farmers, v*io 
are generally not large growers, evade their responsibility for 
ccnplianoe with the Wagner-Peyser Act by arguing that they do not 
have the money to build decent caitps. 

The mechanism for oppression is the processor. Amalgamated Sugar 



-8- 



5336 



Ccnpany, viho recruits for grcwers who are operating substancSard canps. 
Since the processor does not run the cairps, it refuses responsibility 
for the conditions of the very caitps for v^iich exclusively they sipply 
labor, despite recognition that these conditions are as bad — if not 
worse — than those depicted in the recent NBC docimentary on Florida, 
EXAMPLE #2 

Great Vfestem Sugar Octrpany, a sugar processor operating in 
Colorado and other sugar-producing western states, has established 
the Great Western Enployrnent Agency, Inc. (G.W.E.A.) , a Texas private 
corporation, to do its recruitment. 

G.W.E.A. has no permanent enployees. All of its employees are 
enployed by Great Wtestem Sugar Corrpany the rest of the year; and, 
during the periods of time they are enployed by G.W.E.A., they remain 
on Great Western Sugar Corrpany 's payroll and are paid by them. The 
President of G.W.E.A. is the vice president of Great Mfestem Sugar 
Ccnpany in charge of labor, and there are several other interlocking 
directors. 

G.W.E.A. recruits for the processor. Great Western Sugar Ccrtpany — 
not for the grower. Fantworkers are sent by the Ertployment Agency to 
a particular factory district. The field representative at the factory 
district places them with growers, without regard for the living 
conditions at the farm. The corrpany pays the migrants a penny per person 
per mile to core vjp; and a like sum for the return trip, upon certification 
by the grower that the worker has satisfactorily carpleted his contract. 
EXAMPLE #3 

A similar system is used by Heinz, which recruits both for its cwn 
farms and for growers with \A*icm it has output contracts in Iowa and Illinois. 

-9- 



5337 



Heinz' private recruiter. Pickle Smith, carries on recruitment efforts 
in can junction with an eitployee of the Texas Qtployment Connission. 
The private recruiter does the talking and active recruiting, thereby 
avoiding the housing regulations. The State employee takes credit 
for the number of enployees recruited for budget purposes. 

These recnaiters work in conjunction with the Texas Enployment 
Coittnission, the federally-funded state employment agency responsible 
for interstate fanrworker recruititent. Migrants vAio ccme to the 
Texas Enployment Catmissian offices are informally referred to the 
private processors' recruiters. Some corrpanies, like Amalgamated 
and Great Vtestem, maintain separate offices. Others, like Heinz, 
have desks and space in the local state enployment offices. 

The private recruiters report migrants recruited to the Texas 
Enployment Catmissicn, vdiich takes credit for the recruitment for 
budgetary and statistical pruposes, v^iile abdicating all responsibility 
in teme of Wagner-Peyser enforcement responsibility. 

These statistics, of enployees recruited by private food 
processors' recruiters acting in contravention of U.S. Department 
of Labor regulations, are eventually sijbmitted by the states to the 
Departnent of Labor each year to justify present and future federal 
funding levels. 

It is not only in Texas that the State Enployment Offices funded 
by the Department of Labor to provide better job recruitment, placement, 
and wage and housing protections for migrant farnworkers, act as 
direct agents for the growers, processors, and other corporate interests 



-10- 



5338 



in their ejqjloitaticn of the itdgrant. 

An official of the Farm Labor Service of the State of New York 
for a nurter of nonths this year refused to process migrant connplaints 
against a cr&fj leader because the farmer did not want to proceed with 
the ocrplaint. Nor woiiLd his office furnish relevant docurents to 
enable the migrants to process their ccrplciints at the federal level. 
It was carefully e:q3lained that without the farmer's endorsement of 
these ocrplaints, no serious state action oould be conteiTplated. 



-11- 



5339 



SECTION III 

FAILURE OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 

EDUCATION AND WELFARE TO UTILIZE 

EXISTING PROGRAMS TO SERVE 

MIGRANT NEEDS. 



The Migrant Health Act 

Since 1962, the Department of Health, Education and 
Welfare has administered a migrant health program, whose 
ostensible purpose is to ensure that "migrant workers and 
their children. . .share the health protection and services 
generally available to other U.S. citizens."" The extent 
of its failure has been tragically described by the doctors 
sponsored by the Field Foundation and other witnesses before 
the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor during their recent 
hearings. Those attending the hearings were told that agon- 
izing details of "constant unending stream of hximan sufferings. 

"It is difficult to convey the overall impression 
of our group in an objective fashion. Four con- 
secutive days of an endless parade of illness, 
deformity, disability, and human suffering exerted 
a profound and demoralizing effect upon our team."— 

"Almost without exception, intestinal parasites 
were found in the stool specimens examined. Most 



\/ Senate Report 699 of Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 
August 9, 1961 (S. 1130) . 

2/ Dr. Harry S. Lipscomb, Director of Institute for Health 
Services Research, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, 
Texas, Statement to tie Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 
of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, 
July 20, 1970. 

-12- 



5340 



of the children had chronic skin infections. 
Chronically infected draining ears with resulting 
partial deafness occurred in an amazing number of 
the smaller children. We saw rickets, a disorder 
thought to be nearly abolished in this country, 
and every form of vitamin deficiency known to us 
that could be identified by clinical examination 
was reported. 

I doubt that any group of physicians in the past 
thirty years has seen, in this country, as many 
malnourished children assembled in one place as 
we saw in Hidalgo County. "—' 

The true extent of the tragedy can only be measured when 
one realize s that most of the illness and disease seen by 
these doctors is preventable. Migrant farmworkers in the 
United States today are suffering and dying from diseases 
which could be cured by decent food, sanitary housing condi- 
tions and basic health measures that were known to the civilized 
world 100 years ago. 

The doctors found that, as a group: 

"The people whom we examined represent an almost 
"pure culture" of a society totally peripheral to 
the in-Pi uence of American health care. In a na- 
tion where levels of speciality care in medicine 
have achieved laudable heights, this group has not 
yet found its way to our most rudimentary care fa- 
cilities. Such simple necessities as glasses, 
false teeth, braces, hearing aids, dental repair. 



_!/ Dr. Raymond Wheeler, Charlotte, N.C., Statement to the 
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor of the Senate Committee 
on Labor and Public Welfare, July 20, 1970 

-13- 



5341 



rehabilitation, plastic surgery, repair of congeni- 
tal deformities, maintenance of simple hygiene, and 
repair of cervical lacerations following childbirth, 
this population — uniquely — seems to have never 
attained. The specialities of plastic surgery, ob- 
stectrics and gynecology, pediatrics, surgical op- 
thalmology, and otorhinolaryngology have no meaning 
to these people, for they have never had access to 
this high level of professional care." —' 

The evidence of the Field Foundation doctors and others 
clearly indicate that the bulk of the migrant farm-worker 
population has not gotten substantial benefits from this program. 
The statistics substantiate this fact. The migrant has a life 
expectancy twenty years less than the average American. The 
infant and maternal mortality is 125% higher than the national 
average. The death rate from influenza and pneumonia is 200% 
higher than the national rate and from tuberculosis, 250% higher 
than the national rate. The accident rate among migrant farm- 
workers is 300% t)f the national rate. 

One reason for the migrant health program's failure is 
the profound discrepancy between the professed goal of the 
program and the level of funding. Initially $3 per migrant, 
now $15 per migrant, the program's funding is reminescent of 
an underdeveloped country, rather than the United States, where 
the average person now pays about $300 per year in direct costs 
for medical care. 

T7 Statement of Dr. Harry S. Lipscomb, 0£. cit . 

-14- 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 24 



5342 i 

I 

But even within the strictures of a drastically under- 
funded project, the funds appropriated for this program have 
not been utilized in optimal fashion. Expenditures have not 
been made in ways that would foster quality health care for 
migrants. Neither HEW' s awarding of grants nor its monitoring 
of those grants has been carried out in ways designed to assure 
quality care. The reasons are twofold. The first has its 
incieption in administrative decisions relating to methods of 
funding, the types and quality of programs to be funded, and 
the absence of standards by which to measure the potential of 
prospective projects and performance of funded projects. 

The second reason is attributable to the marked success 
of local opposition by state and county medical associations 
and public health departments in defusing recent HEW efforts 
to institute constructive changes in these programs and to fund 
projects that would be capable of delivering quality compre- 
hensive medical care to migrants. 

The following basic policy choices made early in the program 
and continued until a few months ago have rendered the migrant 
health programs ineffective. 

First, rather than using the very limited and admittedly 
inadequate funds to establish a few high quality comprehensive 
care units in places with large migrant populations, the program 

-15- 



5343 

administrators dispersed the funds widely. The average grant 
was less than $60,000 — far too little to produce comprehen- 
sive care clinics. In fact, this amount of money is barely 
sufficient to enable projects to carry on immunization pro- 
grams, tviberculosis clinics, and periodic general outpatient 
hand-out type care. 

Second, despite the fact that the legislation specifi- 
cally provided for funding of special projects run by agencies 
and institutions other than the state and county health de- 
partments, the great majority of projects were entrusted to 
state and local health departments which were neither, inclined, 
equipped, nor technically capable of delivering the type of 
comprehensive medical care needed by the migrant community . 
Most of these local clinics use fragmented methods of medical 
care, almost on an assembly-line basis — i.e., one day per week 
is devoted to a given disease. For example, if a migrant 
mother with a sick baby shows up on a day devoted to well babies, 
the sick baby is not treated. The mother must return on the 
day designated as a sick baby day. Similarly, if a woman came 
in for polio immunization, a cancer test, and treatment for 
a kidney ailment, these clinics are not set up in such a man- 
ner that all of her ills would be diagnosed and treated at the 

-16- 



5344 

same time. She is instead required to return again and again 
at the hours during which the clinic is dispensing that type 
of care (if, indeed, it dispenses it at all). 

An Antioch student who worTted as a migrant in the mid- 
west stream during the summer of 1959 to investigate and re- 
port on life in the migrant stream described one such clinic 
as follows: 

"The general atmosphere was that of a cattle 
vaccination pen - people being herded in and 
out, health cards being checked, filled in, 
duplicated, etc. None of the clinic staff 
. . . could speak a word of Spanish. The 
doctor listened no more than 30 seconds to a 
patient's explanation of his malady. Then out 
came the needle." —' 

While the majority of the patients were children who undoubtedly 

needed vaccinations, they are receiving them at the expense 

of acquiring a fear and distrust of doctors and medicine that 

will not be easily overcome. The student reported that many 

of his fellow farmworkers who badly needed treatment were 

loathe to enter migrant health clinics because they did not 

want the shots which were usually the only treatment offered. 



_1/ Diary of William Burgraff, describing the migrant health 
clinic operated two nights per week in Frost, Michigan, 
summer of 1959. 



-17- 



5345 

Over the years the funded clinics have not adapted 
their procedures to provide comprehensive, primary medical 
care to migrants. In addition, political and personal re- 
lationships tend to impede effective performance by certain 
health department employees whose primary duties under the 
migrant health legislation might come in direct conflict with 
the interests of local growers and other persons of importance 
in certain communities. For example, a sanitarian employed 
by a county health department in an area where growers either 
compose or control the local board of health will be under 
great pressure to avoid effectively enforcing sanitary codes 
in labor camps owned by those growers. 

Third, the program has established few standards of per- 
formance. No guidelines have been promulgated establishing 
standards to which grant recipients must adhere. No assess- 
ment has been made as to the quality of services in fact 
provided by each grantee. 

Few program statistics are kept. In response to enquiries 
relating to the amount of money spent for sanitation, the 
most that could be adduced was tht it was estimated that 
approximately 8 to 10 percent of the program's money was used 



-18- 



5346 

to finance environmental services. No further breakdown was 
available as to what constitutes environmental services or 
how much effective sanitation work was performed with that 
money. Other crucial data, such as a state-by-state break- 
down on amounts spent for physician services or the nxortiber 
of projects offering comprehensive clinics, was also unavail- 
able. Without basic information of this nature, it is not 
possible for anyone to make an informed evaluation of a pro- 
ject . 

In preparing statistics on the program, HEW compiles 
data on "migrants covered." This category statistically 
describes the n\amber of migrants passing through a country 
in which a migrant health project is operated — no matter what 
the scope or quality of the service provided or the length 
of stay of the migrant. 

Fourth, it was determined that the program would be 
operated as a grant program, rather than either as a medical 
care or a community oriented program with high migrant parti- 
cipation at the planning and decision-making stages. The 
bulk of the program staff, both in Washington, D.C, and in 
the regional offices, are people who are neither familiar 
with concepts of medical care organization nor the social and 

-19- 



5347 



economic development of the migrant community. Not one HEW 
migrant health regional representative is a Black, Chicano, 
or Puerto Rican. This program is mainly administered by 
persons who are either out of touch with the needs of the 
people their program is supposed to serve or wedded to tradi- 
tional "safe" public health concepts. 

Despite the March 1970 amendment to the Migrant Health 
Act, which was intended to foster community participation in 
the planning and implementation of each project, few steps 
have been taken to encourage such participation by the migrant 
community. To date about 120 projects have no such consumer 
or community participation and thus continue to operate in 
violation of the law. 

Despite a general recognition of widespread deficiencies 
in the program, no evaluation has been done to assess how 
migrant needs might better be served; whether funds should 
continue to be distributed along present policy lines (giving 
small grants to state and county public health departments 
which are generally unequipped to give comprehensive medical 
care and unresponsive to community needs) ; or whether policies 
of this sort should be re-thought and other alternatives used 
to provide care for migrants. 

-20- 



5348 

The absence of program standards and evaluation mecha- 
nisms serve important local political ends. Without objec- 
tive standards by which to measure performance, it is vir- 
tually politically impossible to defund or terminate a 
project. Funds once allocated tend to become a vested interest 
of the grantee. Absent extraordinary misappropriation of funds, 
they are virtually granted in perpetuity. In essence, the 
program has evolved into a source of funding for the state or 
county health departments to subsidize functions that they 
■would be obligated to perform anyway. 

We have been unable to obtain data on the number of pro- 
jects terminated since the program's outset, but have been 
assured the number is very small. A tabulation of all current 
projects and the number of years eachhas been supported indi- 
cates that 61 current projects have been funded for five or 
more years and 54 current projects are from 1 to 4 years old. 
Between 1962-1969, as funds for the overall program were in- 
creased, more small projects have been added. Few projects 
are ever dropped and increases in funds for on-going projects 
have been modest. A noncompetitive pattern has developed 
which provides little incentive for year to year project 

-21- 



5349 

improvement. The lack of hard data by which to evaluate 
performance perpetrates this system of small, underfunded, 
and ineffective programs. 

As mentioned above, the other basic impediment to suc- 
cessful operation of a migrant health program has" been the 
strength of local political opposition. HEW has received a 
substantial increase in migrant health funds within the past 
year. While its basic funding is still used to maintain 
projects funded in previous years, approximately 3 million 
dollars of new funds were allocated to a limited number of 
projects which would be equipped to offer high quality compre- 
hensive medical care. These new grants have been made to 
community groups with direct ties with the migrant populations 
that they seek to serve, rather than to state or county health 
departments. Each of the grants has been for approximately 
$400,000, and each project is budgeted for two to three doc- 
tors, and a number of paraprofessionals and indigenous aides. 

The political opposition to these programs has been ex- 
treme. The county medical societies have basically objected 
to the use of salaried doctors and to the operation of consumer 
sponsored projects over which they have no control. 



-22- 



5350 



A compelling example of how local opposition has thus 
far prevented migrants from receiving decent health care 
occurred this year in Immokalee, which is located in Collier 
County, Florida (a county with an estimated migrant popula- 
tion of 13,000). After the 1968 hunger hearings in that town, 
there were prof ound pressures to mount a significant health 
effort. The county health department, which had traditionally 
operated the program, adamantly opposed the expansion of its 
program to include significant personal health services to 
migrants. HEW' s migrant program personnel in Washington re- 
cruited the University of Miami to devise a comprehensive 
health care system for Immokalee. The system would have in- 
cluded extensive high quality services by physicians on salary 
and community participation in the policy-making process. 
Opposition by the Collier County Medical Society, the Florida 
Medical Association, and the State Board of Health was suffi- 
cient to induce the government to abandon these plans. Immokalee 
is still devoid of a decent system of health care for migrants. 
A similar program was funded in the more congenial climate of 
neighboring Dade County. 

Another instance where local opposition has prevented a 
svibstantial improvement in migrant health care programs is 



-23- 



5351 

that of Hidalgo County Texas (a county in the lower Rio Grande 

Valley with an estimated migrant population of 40,000). For 

the past five years, the local health department of Hidalgo 

County has operated a migrant health project that even it admits 

is totally inadequate. Not only is the program under- funded, 

but the health department lacks the technical capability to 

deliver good quality health care. It has neither sufficient 

manpower nor equipanent, and has no direct ties to the migrant 

population. 

Dr. Ramiro Casso, a doctor in general practice in McAllen, 

Texas, described the public health activities in Hidalgo County 

as follows: 

"At present, these activities are limited to tuberculosis 
detection, follow-up on contagious diseases, and immuni- 
zation of children. The inadequacy of our immunization 
program was pointed out during the past two months when 
in Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, we (uncovered) suspected 
(cases of) poliomyeitis. " ±/ 

Dr. Casso himself operates a charity clinic at the Farm- 
workers Service Center in McAllen three days a week. He treats 
from 40 to 120 patients a week, but is severely hampered by lack 
of adequate equipment, examining rooms. X-ray and laboratory 
facilities. 



\/ Statement of Dr. Ramiro R. Casso before the Senate 
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, July 20, 1970 

-24- 



5352 

The overwhelming turnout of the people of the Valley 
during the 5 days that the Field Foundation doctors operated 
an accessible clinic demonstrates more compellingly than any 
words how desparate the farmworkers in Hidalgo County are for 
health care. 

The doctors found that: "These people are hungry for 
care. They are dying for want of it." — Yet the Dallas 
regional office of HEW has been content to let the migrant 
health program in Hidalgo County continue to operate at its 
present level. 

A few facts about health conditions in the Valley should 
suffice to illustrate the total inadequacy of the present 
migrant health program. Hidalgo County has more cases of 
tuberculosis than any other county in the country. It also 
presently has a polio epidemic, in which 3 children have died, 
and at least 11 more are suspected of having contracted the 
disease. Dr. John Copenhaver, Director of the migrant health 
projects for Hidalgo and Cameron Counties, criticized the Field 
Foundation doctors' reports as inaccurate because of their shock 
over uncovering a case of leprosy. The local newspapers have 
reported Dr. Copenhaver as asking "What's wrong with one case 
of leprosy? I know there are at least a hundred in the Valley. " 



_1/ Statement of Dr. Harry Lipscomb, op. cit . 

-25- 



5353 

Although Valley-wide inoculation efforts have been under- 
taken by the public health authorities in an effort to halt 
the spread of polio, outreach efforts are proving ineffective 
in reaching the persons who most need the vaccine, many of 
whom live in outlying areas and neither own radios nor read 
the newspaper. 

This past year, there was an opportunity to dramatically 
increase migrant health services to this area. Major efforts 
were initiated by the Washington office. It sought to develop 
ties with a local community organization (Colonias del Valle) , 
to bring together community and provider groups, and to provide 
them with sufficient money to operate a comprehensive health 
care center. HEW had reserved the funds and actively encouraged 
the funding of such a project; the consumers were interested; 
the health department was prepared to cooperate; and Dr. Love, 
the newly elected president of the local medical society, was 
prepared to cooperate. 

It should have been the task of the regional office to 
develop and cement a program in this depressed area. Rather 
than aiding or participating in any of these efforts, the 
regional office simply sat back to await proposals and made no 



-26- 



5354 

affirmative efforts to coalesce a program. It ultimately 
selected the health department proposal, which it acknowledged 
to be completely inadequate. Finally, rather than accepting 
a $400,000 grant for one project, the regional administrators 
persuaded HEW to divide the money in two $200,000 grants, and 
later halved it again. In effect, through lack of interest, 
uninspired leadership, responsiveness to local political pres- 
sure, and general bureaucratic inertia, the regional adminis- 
trators induced HEW to reproduce the traditional inadequate 
and nonresponsive health project in the place of what had 
been a promising beginning for comprehensive, consumer-oriented 
health care. 

Perhaps most blatant of all have been the political and 
private pressures on HEW to suspend payment of funds and/or 
defund the three comprehensive health clinics funded in the 
State of California. Thus far, political pressures have suc- 
ceeded in forcing HEW to suspend payment of funds to the Kern 
County project for 90 days, while the health needs of the 
community undergo additional study. Such a step appears totally 
unprecedented in government contract law. It amounts to uni- 
lateral suspension of a grant for reasons having no basis in 



-27- 



5355 



the grantee's performance. 

Similar pressures are presently being exerted on the 
Imperial Valley Clinic, and a group of local physicians have 
sued HEW to block payment of funds to the migrant health 
clinic. 

Although the Department of Health, Education and Welfare 
has been derelict in its duty to provide quality health care 
to migrants, it has in no sense been derelict in its fulfill- 
ment of the legislative intention behind the passage of the 
original bill. In fact, a student of the legislative history 
of this act cannot be surprised that the migrant gets little 
benefit from the migrant health programs. Congressional re- 
ports docxament that the Migrant Health Act was intended to 
provide protection for the surrounding communities against 
the spread of disease from migrants, to assure a healthy supply 
of laborers to pick the crops, to provide svibsidies for state 
and local health departments, hospitals, and other local in- 
terests. The migrant health program functions well for these 
purposes. The only people who fail to receive benefits are 
the migrants. 



-28- 



5356 



SECTION IV 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE'S FAILURE 

TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE ^, 
MIGRANTS THROUGH EXISTING PROGRAMS - 



1. FOOD STAMP AND COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS 

The Department of Agriculture has adopted a policy of 
consistent refusal to take affirmative steps or institute 
affirmative measures that would enable migrants to receive 
benefits under existing federal food programs. It has done 
so in the face of clear evidence of hunger and need. Selected 
examples of USDA's insensitivity to migrants at every level, 
ranging from matters of far-reaching program and policy con- 
cern to matters of minimal significance to any but the indi- 
vidiuals forced to go hungry, are set forth below: 

First ; Despite USDA recognition that " (M) igrant workers 
and their families while in the migrant stream 



_1/ The information contained in this section was prepared 

by the legal staff of the Migrant Research Project, which 
has previously submitted testimony on this subject. The 
Migrant Legal Action Program, the successor to the MRP 
legal staff, takes full responsibility for the views set 
forth herein, but gratefully acknowledges the resources 
provided by MRP in the preparation of the initial draft 
of this testimony. 



-29- 



5357 

do present special problems because of (1) their 
mobility; (2) the frequently short-term and un- 
predictable patterns of their need for food 
assistance; (3) the constantly changing composi- 
tion of the migrant family as it moves in the 
migrant stream; and (4) the difficulty of pro- 
jecting the current incomes of individual migrant 
families, " — it has taken no steps to institute 
programs responsive to these needs. 
Although in May, 1970, USDA officially stated: 

"We further anticipate that, compared 
with last year, a larger number of mi- 
grants who move into user areas may 
experience longer periods without em- 
ployment . . . . " "— / 

and, although it has additionally reported that 

it anticipates: 

"A continuation, and probably an intensi- 
fication, of temporary periods of unem- 
ployment or under employment because weather 
or other conditions may result in late 
harvest schedules or a temporary stoppage 
of work in the fields . . . ," 1.' 



_1/ Information and Program Data submitted to Senate Subcommittee 
on Migratory Labor by Richard Lyng, Assistant Secretary, 
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, May 25, 1970. (hereinafter re- 
ferred to as USDA data, 5/25/70), No. 1 (f). 

2/ Ibid , No. 1 (e) 

V Ibid . 

-30- 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 25 



5358 

the Department of Agriculture has instituted no 
measures to effectively cope with recognized 
migrant needs for food during these periods of 
unemployinent . 
Second ; Despite the authority granted the Secretary of 
Agriculture under 7 U.S.C. § 2013(b) to call 
hunger amongst a definable portion of the popu- 
lation a national or other disaster and authorize 
commodity distribution and food stamp programs in 
the same jurisdiction for the benefit of such 
persons; and irrespective of clear legislative 
intent that emergency situations as defined in 
that section were specifically intended to include 
seasonal farm workers during the months they are 
out of work; and irregardless of USDA commitments 
in the food stamp hearings that this section would 
be so construed; USDA has consistently refused to 
view hunger amongst migrants as an emergency 
warranting special food distribution efforts. ~ 



_1/ Memorandum to Secretary of Agriculture from Subcommittee 
Counsel re: (1) Issuance of Free Food Stamps, and (2) 
Distribution of Federally owned Foods During Emergency, 
May 9, 1967, reprinted in "Hunger in America^," October 
1968 report of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public 
Welfare, pp. 29-30.' (Footnote continued on next page) 



-31- 



5359 

Third ; Despite the fact that USDA has the further power 
to establish mandatory emergency thirty-day 
certification procedures for migrants in all 
food stamp and commodity programs, and despite 
the fact that a clear and pressing need for such 
procedures has been shown, it has not done so. 



(Footnote continued) 
Mr. Cooley: 



"The fact that a household may have no income 
at all during portions of the year does not 
necessarily prevent that household from parti- 
cipating in the food stamp program. If there 
are circumstances in any community which would 
prevent many households from being eligible to 
participate in the food stamp program for a 
temporary period, it seems to me that this could 
qualify such an area under the "emergency 
situation" provision of the Senate bill and that 
the Secretary of Agriculture would be permitted 
by the language of the Senate bill to institute 
a direct distribution program of such fecope and 
for such period of time as he might determine 
necessary to take care to these families. 

"I have discussed this matter with the Secretary 
of Agriculture and he informs me that this is 
the manner in which he believes the language 
should be construed if the bill is enacted as 
amended. " 

The Cooley-Jones debate must be placed in the context 
of Jones' concern with seasonal agricultural workers in 
his rural district who were without income for several 
months of the year. 



-32- 



5360' 

Fourth : Despite USDA's authority to issue instructions 
and regulations which would exclude a migrant's 
car and/or work transportation costs in compu- 
tations of income, it has not done so. (Similar 
exclusions of work-related transportation costs 
have been promulgated for participants in a 
variety of OEO programs. See, e.g., CFP (FS) 
Instruction 722-2, Rev. 1, 10-2-67). In this 
regard it should also be noted that USDA could 
easily model a regulation along the lines proposed 
by HEW in its family assistance bill. This bill 
clearly distinguishes, among other things, between 
work-related automobile ownership and ownership 
for personal convenience. Accordingly, continued 
maintenance of this arbitrary restriction on 
grounds of administrative feasibility is unwarranted, 



(Footnote continued) 



In that context, and on its face, Cooley's closing 
statement, quoted above, clearly indicates that the 
Secretary is not only empowered, but is expected to 
declare an "emergency situation" where there exists 
a substantial number of householr?= without cash income 
with which to meet the minimum purchase requirements 
for food stamps. 



-33- 



5361 

Fifth ; Despite widespread realization of hunger in the 

migrant stream, USDA has not even talcen the mini- 
mal step of issuing a regulation broadening the 
interpretation of a "cooking facility" to enable 
the many migrant families on the road who do not 
carry stoves and perhaps cook over campfires to 
be eligible for food stamps. 

S ixth : Most egregious of all the abdications of its 
responsibility is USDA's steadfast refusal to 
collect relevant data to assess migrant needs, — 
coupled with its consistent use of lack of data 
as an excuse for failure to develop programs for 

.• ■ ^- 2/ 
migrant participation. — 

For any agency to formulate and administer major 

programs and policies without data, and in fact 

without any reliable information upon which to 



(Footnote continued) 



Once such emergency is determined^ the Secretary then 
has authority to distribute free federally owned foods 
in an area, concurrently with the operation of a food 
stamp program, under Commodity Credit Corporation dis- 
tribution legislation and under Section 32 of the 
agricultural Adjustment Act. 

_1/ USDA data 5/25/70, No. 2 (c) . "It has not been deemed 
feasible or practical to request States and areas to 
identify and classify the categories of participants." 

2/ Appendix A contains an in-depth analysis of the USDA 

statistics supplied in conjunction with USDA data 5/25/70, 

-34- 



5362 



base such data, — has in other contexts been 
considered an abdication of responsible functioning 
and subject to judicial or legislative redress. 
Under 7 U.S.C. § 2019, which sets forth guide- 
lines for administration of the food stamp pro- 
gram, USDA has both the power and the discretion 
to promulgate uniform regulations for all partici- 
pating states which would: 

(a) force state plans to take into account 
migrant problems and set forth special 
procedures for dealing with them; 

(b) establish uniform reporting formats for 
all state and local authorities, and 
enforce compliance therewith as a basis 
for participation in the food stamp pro- 
gram; 

(c) promulgate special certification procedures 
to be put into effect as part of every 
state plan, which would apply to those 
persons such as migrants who are not 
effectively participating in food programs. 



1/ Ibid . , No, 2(b) 

-35- 



5363 

We submit that USDA has not merely passive authority in 
operation of these programs, but an affirmative responsibility 
to take these steps, and to force state plans to institute 
policies responsive to migrant needs. To do less in the face 
of such clear need constitutes a continuing abuse of discretion. 

The problems impeding migrant participation in federally- 
funded food programs have been recognized and documented for 
years. They include, for example, the failure to require 
flexibility in the lumpsum or twice a month coupon issuance in 
food stamp programs, despite realization that many poor people 
have not enough cash to make the initial payment. Some of 
the most common and recurring problems preventing migrants 
from receiving the benefits of both programs are set forth 
below: 

Certification Problems; Families receiving public assis- 
tance are automatically eligible for participation in the food 
stamp and commodity distribution programs. Poor families not 
receiving pxiblic assistance must demonstrate their eligibility 
for certification to purchase food stamps or commodities. 

Migrants, because public assistance has until recently 
been conditioned on residence and federal assistance is pre- 
dicated upon classifications which normally exclude migrant 



-36- 



5364 

family eligibility, are usually in the category of non-public 
assistance households. They, therefore, are continually 
obliged to establish their eligibility for stamps. 

While any process of applying for benefits from the gov- 
ernment entails some difficulties and demeaning of the appli- 
cant, there are usually ways in which the hardship and the 
extent to which the process is demeaning can be minimized. 
For migrants, not only are the problems not minimized; they 
are multiplied by a factor which affects no one else. Because 
of their transitory status they are subjected to this process 
more often. They repeatedly face new personnel, new hours, 
new questions, and new standards. There are no standard 
criteria for documentation of need, income, etc. Nor is there 
a standard pattern of questions to determine income: How much 
did you make last month? How much did you make last year? 
What do you usually make a month? How much do you expect to 
make this month? Next month? Each of these questions will 
elicit a different response. Yet, on any of those varying 
criteria, a determination is made regarding eligibility for 
food program benefits. 

Once again, non-standard methods for eliciting income 
information present a greater problem for migrants than others. 

-37- 



5365 

Normally, applicants living in an area and dealing with 
the same office over a period of time learn what type of 
information is being sought and the officials learn to eval- 
uate the information offered, A private, local language 
develops, but the migrant is not a party to this communication 
process. He will often be denied his right to participate 
because he and the local office misunderstood what information 
was sought or supplied. 

Local offices not only use different questions to get 
information about income, but their understanding of income 
is not applicable to a person who works only fiDur, five, or 
six months, and USDA has taken no steps to develop a standard 
to apply to migrant incomes and to insure that it is consis- 
tently applied. 



-38- 



5366 



Documentation Problems ; Migrants often work for crew 
leaders and never know the identity of their true employ r. 
They shift employers frequently, sometimes daily. They are 
often paid in cash. Debts (real and pretended) are deducted 
from wages, etc. To obtain a fair picture of a migrant's 
economic position takes time and techniques which differ 
from those applicable to non-transient poor. 

Local standards for documentation fail to take into 
account the special problems of migrants. Moreover, even if 
the migrant can provide the level and type of documentation 
in one locality, he is faced with different requirements in 
other localities. The migrant, because he changes jobs, does 
not know his employer, is paid in cash, and moves around, has 
less documentation of income than others; but in order to 
participate in the food stamp and/or commodity programs, he 
must produce more documentation than anyone else, since he 
will be called upon to meet different requirements in different 
places. He must carry with him at all times extensive records 
of the minimal income he actually receives, and, in addition, 
is faced with the almost impossible task of affirmatively 
documenting lack of income at slack employment periods. 



-39- 



5367 



Insufficient Outreach Efforts ; There is inadequate 
outreach effort on the part of USDA and local officials in 
the operation of all food programs generally; and the failure 
to reach migrants is even more compelling than the general 
failure. There is not even a USDA estimate of target popu- 
lation, and no statistical mechanism to determine whether or 
not any given county is serving the needs of the people. 

USDA reports that "outreach programs are not monitored 
through a regular reporting system.""" Yet, no efforts are 
being undertaken to institute one. 

Rejections ; Assistant Secretary Lyng recently reported: 
"The Department of Agriculture does not require States and 
localities to report to it on the results of the millions 

of certification actions undertaken each year in dealing with 

2/ 
hundreds of thousands of applicant households."— Without 

data on rejections there is no way to determine the nature 

of the local decisions that affect the operation of these 

food programs. The food stamp program, in particular, is 

remarkably unconcerned with rejections. Several pages of 

regulations deal with the rights of the grocery store owner 



1/ USDA data, 5/25/70, No. 3(a) 
2/ Ibid., 5(a). 



-40- 



5368 



who is denied the right to accept stamps. None, however, 
deal with the poor person who is denied the right to purchase 
them. Nor has USDA in its recently instituted hearing proce- 
dures mandated expedited time schedules for hearings and 
appeals, despite the urgency of problems of hunger and the 
fact that any delays in certification of migrants, no matter 
how short, are usually the equivalent of a total denial because 
the migrant is forced to move on in search of food and employ- 
ment and his rights become moot. 

The obtaining of adequate statistical data on decertifi- 
cation and rejections and related matters such as office hours, 
outreach efforts, etc. is crucial to insuring that the food 
programs work for the typical poor person, as well as for the 
migrant. It is likewise crucial to an intelligent assessment 
of the program and the fostering of constructive changes. 

Since USDA now places principal reliance on the expansion 
of its food stamp program, one significant deficiency in the 
fiscal priority system warrants particular comment. The money 
appropriated for the food stamp program is given out in the 
following way: Counties apply for the program. They are 
accepted on a first-come, first-serve basis, with no condition 



-41- 



5369 

placed on the amount that can be spent. The food stamp budget 
is maintained by admitting only as many new counties as the 
budget can cover. (If the food stamp budget were lowered, 
the equivalent technique for retrenchment would presumably 
involve cutting off counties rather than setting a limit on 
what could be spent in any county. ) 

This allocation method is improper. It leaves to chance 
the question of which county is to be served and which will 
be held on the waiting list. Of necessity, it permits a re- 
latively richer person in County A to receive food stamps before 
a relatively poorer one in County B. It is not based on a 
standard of need. At best, the allocation method can be de- 
scribed as an aid to accounting, not a technique tailored to 
effectively feed the poor with money designated for that func- 
tion. 

USDA's highly suspect allocation system is paralleled by 
many other deficiencies that undercut its mandate to administer 
the programs to serve all poor persons possible. For example, 
USDA apparently has no way of determining the number of persons 
in a county that are in need of food stamps. Nor has it any 
way of determining whether the local program meets the local 



-42- 



5370 



needs. And it takes no steps to collect necessary data to 
evaluate these needs. The food stamp program is supposed to 
be a federal program operated by cooperating state agencies. 
Yet the overall system of allocation does not even allow the 
federal government to learn whether the money is reaching the 
people who most need it. 

Rather, the department's technique for allocating funds 
and balancing its budget places a premium on keeping each 
county's expenditures roughly constant. Every county may 
spend as much as it can. Since there is no limit on a county's 
spending, USDA must rely on the fact that counties will have 
a roughly constant level of expenditures . If a county suddenly 
spends more, USDA will want to know the reason. Inquiries 
from USDA will naturally retard the eagerness of any county 
to spend more. But there is never a target study to determine 
a proper level of expenditure per county per month of the year. 
Indeed, there is a reluctance built into the system — one that 
operates to inhibit a county from increasing its expenditures — 
at the same time that the county might be asked to seek out and 
serve an influx of migrants. Within the program design and 
fiscal priority system sanctioned by USDA, it is no small wonder 



-43- 



5371 

that migrants are not and cannot be served by the food stamp 
program. 

2. CHILD FEEDING PROGRAMS 

In addition to the operation of broadly mandated food 
stamp and commodity distribution programs, the USDA adminis- 
ters seven other food oriented programs directed at meeting 
the special nutritional needs of young children: school 
breakfast, school lunch, plentiful foods, direct commodity 
distribution, school milk, special food service and non-food 
assistance. 

Legislation creating these seven youth-oriented feeding 
programs expressly recognized the failure of existing general 
food programs to meet the special needs of the growing child. 
The collective goal of the seven programs is to provide the 
minimum nutritional requirements necessary to enable every 
child to develop into a physically normal adult. 

The child of the migrant family is unquestionably an in- 
tended beneficiary of these programs. However, the administrative 
framework under which the youth food programs operate precludes 
significant participation by children of migrant families. 
Although USDA has many times been made aware--through prior 



-44- 



5372 

testimony, articles, and in-field studies and reports — of the 
special nutritional problems of migrant children, and although 
it has repeatedly acknowledged the existence of these special 
needs, it has failed to reorient its youth programs to meet 
them. By not taking immediate steps to correct the deficiencies 
in these programs USDA has ignored clear Congressional mandates. 
One major problem occurs because the youth feeding programs 
are institutionally based: they are all housed in and admin- 
istered by educational or quasi-educational institutions (e.g., 
day care centers, day camps, etc.). For many months of the year 
the child of the migrant family does not receive the benefits 
of any program geared to the normal schedule of an educational 
institution because: 

1. The migrant child is most in need of assistance 
during the summer months when he is not in school but traveling 
with his family. 

2. The migrant child, whether in the home-based state 
or in the stream, frequently leaves school to work in the 
fields alongside his parents. 

USDA regulations governing the youth feeding programs 
pose many of the same problems as the food stamp and commodity 
distribution regulations — e.g., arbitrarily imposed qualifications 



-45- 



5373 

for certification, lack of uniform channels for communication 
between state and federal agencies, etc. In addition, there 
are other serious administrative deficiencies in these programs. 
These problems are further compounded by USDA's refusal to com- 
pile accurate data and establish necessary guidelines to eval- 
uate (1) whether the program is reaching all classes of intended 
beneficiaries; and (2) whether it is being administered in a 
fair and non-discriminatory manner. 

Most of the youth feeding programs distribute the money 
on a matching funds basis — i.e., the local school agrees to 
provide "x" dollars in return for a promise from the state and 
federal governments to provide "y" dollars. 

As is true of most programs administered in this manner, 
the local school system frames its request for matching funds 
on a yearly estimate of its needs. Since neither the magnitude 
of the influx of migrant children nor their special nutritional 
needs can be predicted with any accuracy, a system sanctioning 
an allotment of funds one year in advance necessarily discounts 
the needs of migrant children who are not stable members of the 
community. 

The built-in limitations to local resources take on parti- 
cular significance because they cannot be detected under the 



-46- 



36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8-A -- 26 



5374 

present reporting and monitoring system. There are no effective 
recordkeeping requirements. USDA has placed the responsibility 
for data collection and recordkeeping with the state agencies, 
but has not established uniform formats or standards to insure 
all states will be compiling comparable data. Indeed, the regu- 
lations do not even require that the state administering agencies 
conduct an audit or otherwise monitor the programs. Thus, USDA 
disperses millions of dollars in support of youth feeding pro- 
grams without periodic audits as to how the money is being spent. 
This lack of a regular audit of the needs and disbursements 
of local agencies allows a school unable to meet the financial 
burden of feeding temporary students to either simply refuse to 
feed them or to stretch its regular budget to serve an expanded 
population, and no one will be the wiser if a school system chooses 
to evade its responsibilities by either course of action.— 



J./ Under the Proposed Revision of the Regulations Governing 
the National School Lunch Program to become effective for 
the school year 1970-71, the local agency will be required 
to file a monthly breakdown of the number of lunches served 
at full and reduced prices and at no cost. This report is 
to contain, however, only the number of lunches served and 
not the number of children requiring the benefits of subsi- 
dized lunches. 



-47- 



5375 



The timing of USDA's fiscal request system creates still 
another problem for communities planning to include migrant 
family children in their estimates. Under the regulations 
governing the youth food programs any school interested in 
participating in the youth food programs is required to submit 
a semi-annual report indicating the amount of money necessary 
to run programs during the next six months. Reports are due 
on the first days of April and Octobter of each year. 

As of April first, most of the local agencies that should 
be serving migrant children in the summer stream states have 
no accurate method of estimating the number of additional 
children who will be arriving in the community, or the addi- 
tional expenses necessitated by their advent. Similarly, under 
the October filing date, many "summer states" will have cut 
back their requests, presuming that the migrant child will soon 
leave the area; but the "winter state" is not yet in a position 
to accurately estimate the number of children returning to 
the area.— 

There is still another serious problem created by USDA's 
refusal to undertake the responsibility of overseeing the general 



1/ Under the Proposed Revisions the dates for filing the 
semi-annual report have been changed to March 1 and 
October 1, but the problems remain basically the same, 

-48- 



5376 

administration of the youth food programs--a problem common 
to all recipients, not just migrant family children. Although 
regulations forbid the local agency from discriminating against 
those who cannot afford to pay for their meals, USDA has not 
developed a monitoring system to insure that schools are in 
fact complying and providing meals to all eligible persons in 
a manner that prevents discrimination against those unable 
to pay and in a way that insures all needy children are fed — 
And there is no administrative procedure short of commencing 

judicial proceedings whereby a recipient can attack discrimi- 

2/ 
natory treatment.— 

The problems cited in this section are not new. All 

were cited in testimony recently presented to this Committee 

and other appropriate Committees. Yet, USDA has consistently 



_1/ Under the proposed regulations, the local agency will 

now be required to develop procedures to protect students 
from discrimination. But once this set of procedures is 
filed with and accepted by the State agency, no further 
demands are made of the schools unless a spot check of 
the schools by the state authorities uncovers a violation. 
This proposal neither assures uniformity in the monitor- 
ing of local feeding programs nor effective enforcement 
of a fundamental provision in the feeding programs. 

2/ Under the proposed revisions, families denied requests 
for food assistance for their children may invoke a 
grievance procedure. However, no procedure for redress 
is provided for the child who is receiving food in a 
discriminatory manner. 

-49- 



5377 

failed even to acknowledge that the problems exist with regard 
to migrant family children, let alone propose a mechanism for 
eliminating these problems. As recently as June 19 of this 
year, Mr. Richard Lyng, Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, 
in presenting testimony before the Select Committee on Nutri- 
tion and Human Needs, admitted that the focus of the child 
nutrition programs needed to be re-oriented. He added quite 
surprisingly, however, that USDA has already decided to place 
emphasis on children residing in urban areas. 

While we feel that any remedial work done in the area of 
child assistance programs is admirable, we firmly believe that 
the child of the migrant family has aQ equal right and need to 
receive the benefits of any reorientation.— We feel the child 
of the migrant family has an equal right to eat. 



_1/ Study of the Proposed Revisions makes it clear that 
those administrative provisions are aimed at urban 
schools with a fairly stable child population. The 
provisions for notification of the availability of 
food assistance programs, as well as those for supply- 
ing and collecting the applications for program 
assistance, are to be handled on a yearly basis (at 
the beginning of each school year) . Clearly, this 
mechanism can work only in schools with stable popu- 
lations. 



-50- 



5378 



SECTICN V 
A CALL TO ACTICN 

What we propose here txxJay is not just (jc a nn unity participaticxi 
in the cperaticn of programs, or greater funding levels, or a 
c3epartmental or interdepartnental task force. 

We call for a v^olesale effort for reform, instituted and led 
by this S\±)ccinnittee, perhaps in con junction with the standing 
Senate Operations Committee, to feret out the oppressors — v^iether 
public or private persons — and to hold them directly accountable 
for their illegal and irtiTDral deeds. This Ccmnittee must expand 
functioning and staff or fund an appropriate organ — to be an arm 
of this Congress — to act as an cnbixJsnen. It must short cirCToit 
the bureaucratic red tape and indifference, counter political pressure 
and vested interests such as agri-business, and the large farmers on 
the federal dole and their associations and cooperatives. 

It must go beyond rhetoric and create the fulfillment of conditions, 
guaranteed to all other classes of Americans, that assure basic economic 
security, social and educational opportunity. Not only must migrant 
health and nutritional needs be met, but migrants must have the right 
to associate freely with one anodier and others, including caiitiunity 
and labor organizers. Without this basic right, self-help is forever 
foreclosed. 

If the migrant can earn a decent wage, have vocational and 



-51- 



5379 



educaticnal c^^partxjnity and be assured of an equal right to the 
political process — a fair share of federal largess, plus a right 
to confront his bureaucratic and political oppressors — then nore 
general hearings will be unnecessary. 



-52- 



5380 



APPENDIX A 



ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM AGRICULTURE 

After the data furnished the Subcommittee on Migratory 
Labor by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in support of their 
responses to its interrogatories was made available to the public, 
the staff of the Migrant Research Project requested this data and 
made a detailed analysis thereof. A summary of conclusions dravm 
from this analysis is set forth below. 

Our analysis of the data consisted of a review of the nation- 
wide totals relating to the commodities program for the eleven 
month period between March 1969 and February 1970, and the state by 
state totals relating to the food stamp program for the nine month 
period between April 1969 and January 1970. 

Our staff further made a selective analysis of all the data 
provided on the comjiiodities and food stamp programs for the states 
of Texas and Michigan. This study covered the 35 month period be- 
tween March 1967 and February 1970. Wc likewise made an analysis 
for the food stamp program for a six month period betv^een January 
1970 and June 1970. 



-53- 



5381 



This data, taken as a whole, can be criticized for being 
technically very weak. As an example, during the 12 month 
period of food stamp program data studied, an analyst discovered 
36 errors in sim.ple addition and transcription of the figures. 
That this was not an isolated incident was shown by the fact that, 
upon doing a more detailed analysis of the general food stamp data, 
the same staff member discovered 11 errors in either addition or 
transcription, plus another 10-12 entries that were completely 
missing. 

The presence of these numerous errors unquestionably casts 
a great deal of doubt upon the entire data set provided in support 
of answers to some critical questions posed by the Subcommittee. 
In addition, there were at least three other problems in the 
physical presentation of the data that render it useless in terms 
of any understanding of the formulation of USDA policy that it 
might provide. 

I . Lack of any definitions for the terms of classification . 

Agriculture has divided up both its food stamp and its 
commodity data into a number of categories--i.e. , cities receiving 
assistance, persons on public assistance receiving food stamps, etc, 



-54- 



5382 



These classifications are, of course, basic to persons wishing 
to gain basic information from the data. Yet the classification 
is deceptive in appearance, for though it appears to portray a 
certain situation, in reality it fails to provide any definition 
of the meaning of information which it purports to represent. 

As an example of this problem is the following statement: 
In January of 1970, there were two cities receiving commodity 
distribution within the state of Texas. A question immediately 
arises as to what is meant by a city? Is a city thirty-five 
families living in a four mile area or three thousand-five hundred 
families living in a four block area? 

Obvious problems arise from the lack of clear criteria or 
definitions, including: (1) lack of significance of the statistics, 
i.e., the analyst has no idea how much weight to give to a particu- 
lar statistical representation; (2) lack of ability to make com- 
parisons, i.e., the analyst has no way of knowing whether a 
statistical representation relating to the food stamp program is 
comparable to a representation under the same category relating to 
the commodity program; and (3) lack of ability to detect trends of 
increase or decrease within a category during a given time period. 

-55- 



5383 

II. Lack of any form of uniformity in presentation of the data . 
Agriculture does not present its food stamp and its com- 
modity data by the same method. While data relating to food 
stamps is presented in terms of county totals within a given state, 
data relating to commodities is presented in terms of state totals 
within the total nation. 

Obviously, this lack of uniformity precludes comparison of 
the performance of the food stamp program against the commodities 
program. In addition, the lack of uniformity in presentation 
means that in those states which have a heavy influx of migrants, 
one can only estimate if migrants are being served in any given 
county where the state has a food stamp program; if the state has 
a commodity program, one is pi"ovided with only the gross state 
total which provides no way to estimate the proportion of migrants. 

III. Lack of an auditing system to insure statistical validity . 
As mentioned at the outset, the statistical representations 

obtained from Agriculture contained numerous errors in not only 
addition, but also in simple transcription of the figures from one 
month's report to the next. 

The problem inherent in these errors is very serious when 
one considers that it is upon the basis of this incorrect information 

-56- 



5S84 



that Agriculture predicates future policy decisions to both the 
food stamp and commodity programs. 

IV. Conclusion . 

As the data nov; exists, any hypotheses the Department of 
Agriculture or anyone else might formulate and any conclusion 
drawn from the data v;ould be def initionally insignificant, forma- 
tively inconsistent and statistically invalid. 



-57- 



5385 



APPENDIX B 



REPORTED INCIDENTS INVOLVING PROBLEMS POOR 
PEOPLE HAVE HAD IN OBTAINING ENTREE TO AND FREE 
CARE IN McALLEN HOSPITAL, McALLEN , TEXAS, A NEW 

HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTED WITH HILL-BURTON FUNDS 



While two of the most egregious practices detailed below 

(those involving bad checks and visa manipulation) have recently 

1/ 
been discontinued, this was not because of any supervisory 

action by HEVJ. Despite the fact that these practices have been 

reported to the persons in charge of administering Hill-Burton 

funds, no corrective action has been taken by them. 

Case 1: The hospital administration often blocks attempts 

to pay bills, and the patient is forced to assume the burden of 

getting a loan and repaying it with interest: X had an operation 

in the McAllen Hospital. The bill came to $128.60. Hidalgo 

County VJclfare Department agreed to pay part of the bill, actually 

a substa-atial part, but the hospital would not accept the money 

from the u'elfarc^. Department until the patieni" had paid his part. 

So the patient, who had no money at all, was offered the chance 

to sign a note agreei'ng to finance the bill, there])y obligating 



_!/ There ere conflicting reports on this. Some repiorts indi- 
cate that these practices are still in effect, but in a greatly 
redviced f?ishion. 

-58- 



5386 



himself to the interest payments. County Welfare is sometimes 
helpful in paying a portion of the hospital costs, but it is 
standard practice for the hospital . to refuse this money until 
the patient can pay his share (quite often less than half) . 

Case 2 : X had an outstanding bill of $105.16 from the 
McAllen Hospital. As is their custom with many outstanding 
accounts, the hospital sold the note to a Collection agency. 
This agency is now barraging X with notices and threats, such 
as "PREPARATORY LISTING FOR CIVIL COURT." While some attorneys 
feel this is unauthorized practice of law, the debtor usually 
does not know this and is terrified by such a notice. 

Cas e 3: /This practice, formerly in use by the hospital 
administration, is reported to have been recently discontinued^/ 
The patient would be presented with a bill for his stay in the 
hospital. If unable to pay the full amount at that very moment, 
he v7ould be asked by the business manager to sign a blank check 

from a bank in which he did not have an account. The business 
manager v/ould convince the person that it was all right to sign, 

that it was just something like an agreement to pay \;hen possible, 



-59- 



5387 



etc. After the person signed, the business manager would inform 
him that he had written a bad check, that it was hot, and that he 
could be prosecuted and thrown in jail. The local District 
Attorney received 86 of these checks from the hospital. He told 
them he was not a collection agency and was not going to prose- 
cute these people, and to stop this illegal practice. A Catholic 
priest, who was working in McAllen at the time and was involved 
in investigating this practice, reports that he personally saw 
two drawers full of these checks in the office of the hospital busi- 
ness manager. 

Case 4 ; Another practice, recently discontinued, was to 
ask the patient for his green card (his immigration visa), just 
to check, and then keep it and tell the patient that he would be 
reported to the immigration authorities and probably deported if 
he did not pay the bill L-nmediately. Although the patient was in 
no danger of being deported or put in jail, ir.ost patients never 
knew this. The patient would be forced to borrow the money from 
a finance company, often pavming all of his possessions to pay the 
hospital bill. 

-60- 



AMHERST COLLEGE LIBRARY 
DATE DUE 



Case 5 : 

demand a deposi 
and the hospit£ 
the deposit is 
of a newborn be 
his wife admitt 
child home unti 
The patient haj 
the business oj 
worked out some 
she will releaj 
tells the perse 
should take oui 



tal to 
itted, 
or until 
e father 
to have 

and 
procedure, 
lip from 

or else 
ir) before 
e usually 
iwhere and 



Senator MonualiI!;. we sianu m icccoo um-jii uvmn^i hj *v nlOTning at 
10 o'clock. 

(AMiereupon, at 2:40 p.m. the subcommittee recessed, to recon- 
vene at 10 a.m. of the following day, Tuesday, July 21, 1970.) 

O 



-61-