nt- 
‘TO 
sm, 
‘nd 
1y,. 
at, 
by 
to 
urt 
)se 
he 
ild 
wat 
as 
me 
‘he 
ile 
to 
at 
rQ- 
1st 
at 
nd 
re 
of 
N= 
10 
ol- 
its 
ce 
18, 
re 
no 
to 
at 
iF 
1g 
in 
[ per 
at 
n 
UNEMPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 157 
that it is unwilling and unable to cope with the problems of local self 
government. 
Allusion was made yesterday, apparently with a view of bolstering 
up the.idea that we need a Federal employment service, to the Federal 
employment agency that existed during the World War. That was 
purely a war measure within the province of the Federal Government 
so long and only so long as the Federal Government was engaged in 
2 war and needed that and other agencies to aid in the prosecution of 
that war. That agency was successful because at that time there 
Were many more jobs than there were men to fill them, and the 
problem at that time was to find employees to fill these vacant posi- 
tions; not the situation we have to-day, where we have got to put 
employees in situations that do not exist. And the fact that it was 
successful during the war is no argument for the continuation in these 
days of peace of what was properly and legitimately a war activity, 
And in reverting to the suggestion about answering these unemployed 
with cold legal arguments, I will say that these men are not sitting on 
park benches because of cold legal arguments; they are sitting on 
park benches because there are no jobs, and it has not been suggested 
by anybody that S. 3060 will create a single job, except for the group 
of bureaucrats to be centered at Washington to control the activities 
of State agencies throughout the country and possibly to throw out 
of employment those persons who already are engaged in the conduct 
of private employment agencies. 
[t may be in line with the great economic theory that the only way 
to solve the employment problem is to fire a certain percentage of 
those that are now employed, as was suggested here yesterday, and 
possibly by firing all the employees eventually of those private 
employment agencies they will create a demand for new commodities 
that will give employment to those full-time employees that are 
retained. I mean that is as nearly as I can follow the theory that was 
Suggested to the committee yesterday. But if the States choose to 
put private employment agencies out of existence and if the States 
have that power, that is a matter for the State legislatures and the 
People of those States to consider, and it is not a policy that should 
be dictated by a bureaucratic director sitting in the Department of 
Labor in Washington, attempting to lay down uniform rules and regu- 
lations that would govern sheep herders in Wyoming and cowboys in 
Nevada and miners in California. And yet we hear this cry for 
uniformity. I think, if I might suggest it on the question of uniform- 
ity, that possibly this present day situation is largely aggravated by 
the fact that most of the people in the United States have uniformly 
been engaged in speculation and gambling for the past several years. 
, Another suggestion that comes as a basis for this sort of legislation 
18 the necessity of stimulating the States to do something, and I want 
to call the attention of the committee to this fact that, like all other 
artificial stimulation, it creates a disease worse than that which is 
Sought to be cured. In the maternity act, in the vocational rehabilita~ 
tion and vocational education acts, what do we find? All of those 
Acts were put onto the statute books and Federal Government dug 
Into the pockets of the taxpayers of the country and went into a 
50-50 game to stimulate the States, and every year we have repre- 
Sentatives of the State agencies, that are helping in their communities 
‘o spend the Federal money, coming back here to Washington and 
Saying “We can not carry on unless you give us more stimulation.”