E.r-

Hollow Core Doors

U{EI{ YOU BUY A DOOR V tuz conE!

Wise builders ond orchitects everywhere ore specifying I i" REZO Hollow Core Doors. They know the qdded beouty snd sturdiness thot I f " doors give. They know too thot REZO I nl" doors cosl No rllore fton other comporoble I f" doors ond mony times even less. For your nexl iob Be Wise. Specify REZ0 l:".

government organization that spent 9408,000 buying $4,_ 800,000 worth of goods. He said a good private purchas_ ing department would buy twice that amount of stuff for about one-eighth that amount of expense. He said that all government agencies and departments are badly overstaffed, and that one employee out of every five could be let go, and the remainder would do a better job.

The Los Angeles Times of September 15, 1951, gave some interesting figures editorially. It quoted the Council of State Chambers of Commerce as furnishing the following information: Since the start of the Korean war the Ar^i has purchased 68,000,0(X) can openers, or more than 45 can openers for every man in the Army; Army Ordinance dis_ rupted the paint market by purchasing 6,0fl),000 gallons of ' paint in small cans instead of customary big containers, and demanding a year's supplj, in 60 days; between July 1950 and March 1951 the Army euartermaster Depart_ ment bought 1,917,000 pounds of black pepper. Another small example to show which way the waste wind blows, the Times tells about the State Department requesting $24,87 5 to provide a series of luncheons for visiting foreign students. There were to be lZ5 such luncheqrs for 14 to 18 persons each, and the tab figures out to be $g.23 a plate.

The other day I listened to a speech made by a very prominent man, a transplanted Louisianian who is Secretary of the Southern California Committee for the Hoover Re_ port. He calmly related dozens of examples of the fearful jump in the cost of government in the last ten or eleven ye:rrs. He is Wm. H. Courtney, a thoroughly reliable and respected gentleman, and his figures seemed like a night_ mare. ffow various of the larger bureaus in Washington jumped ten times and even more in size in ten years, is decidedly shocking. But Mr. Tr-uman says all these stories are a "pack of lies." Of course Senator Byrd, of Virginia, immediately issued a lot of figures contradicting those of Mr. Truman, but f have not space for them here.

rn brief Senator "rru."";, l,ftr. "ota factual figures show that in the fiscal year 1946 when we were at the peak of World War Two, we spent only $3,600,000,000 for non_ defense purposes. In 1948 the president asked for and got $6,100,000,000 for non-defense spending. This year, with military requirements calling for retrenchment in every other field to avoid inflation, the president has asked for $9,800,000,000 for non-military purposes. This is a third greater than in peacetime l94g and two_and_ahalf times the amount found to be essential in the previous military expansion period." ***

And, from a recent bulletin of the National Retail Lum_ er Dealers Association, comes the following along this same line: "ft is too early to tell just how much Federal expenditures will have been reduced by Congress, because some appropriation bills are pending and because there are sure to be some supplementary appropriations later on. But Gene Ebersole sends us from Texas a comparison of expenditures by non-defense agencies of the government for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1940, and June 3e 1950. The Commerce Department, for example, went up from $75 million to $863 million; Interior from $71 million to $568 million; Labor from gt9 million to g25Z million; State from $Zt million to $361 ririllion. All in all, expenditu:es for non-defense purposes rose from $3.5 'tillion to $11.2 billion.

:F**

I think we should take a look at the other side of the picture, even though there is only one shining example to be found on the side of economy and interest in the taxpayer. I can't help wondering what the rest of the Bu_ reaucrats think of Lindsay Warren? you see, Lindsay is the head bookkeeper for the United States of America, and he knows more than anyone else about the cost of our government. He is a good Democrat, used to be Congress_ man from "Nawth Calina" before he got the job of Comp_ troller General in charge of the General Accounting Office, and he appeared before the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments recently, also.

{<t<*

Since reading his testimony concerning the development of high efficiency in his own big department, with the accompanying reduction in personnel and in cost, I have been wondering how he dare travel among the Bureaus unguarded. You know why? This man, at a time when the other branches of government were mushrooming and expand_ ing in all directions and armies of new employees were being added to the federal payrolls; and when the amount of work in his own department was vastly increased, he committed the unforgivable sin-he cut expenses. yes sir, in New Deal Washington that sin is unforgivable, and, let me add, practically unheard of.

Yes sir, in the midst ; ;" lrt"rorr""t payrofl padding that has been going on in Washington, he cut his office force from 14,904 people in 1946, to 6959 in 1951, and improved the service and efficiency. He told about abolishing an entire division in his department, letting 325 people go, and replacing them with 69 people who are doing a better job than was done before. He said that constant surveys of his department enabled him to accomplish such wonders. The one just quoted is only a sample of how he more than cut his force in two, at the same time taking on tremendous volumes of new work created by the expanding government. ***

He is like the rooster in the old story who rolled the ostrich egg into the barnyard where the hens could see it, and said to them, "I just want to show you what can be done." But, you know something, Junior, I'll lay you six, two, and even, no limit and no holds barred, that there will be little if any effort made to follow his example. He said himself that most of the department heads consider cutting down payrolls as simple political suicide. **

And now that the defense efrort is swinging into high gear, the air and the public prints are filled with storiis concerning the profusion of over-loaded payrolls. you will hear and read that when the government needs one man