Work Relief Administration Press Conferences
Index  |  Publishing Information

Press Conference
Harry Hopkins
July 3, 1935
10:30 AM

Query:	How about clarifying some of the clarifications. I understand, for instance, the New York program calls for some rather large building projects which are being conducted under Works Progress rather than PWA.
Mr. Hopkins:	I do not know of any projects submitted by the New York WPA that would not qualify under this.
Query:	The President this morning listed new buildings; New York University, for instance.
Mr. Hopkins:	Of course, New York University may be broken don into fifty different projects and most of them I assume are extensions to things. I do not know the details, but my people tell me in all the New York City projects submitted of course, really several hundred—there may be one or two that ought to come out under this, but not much.
Query:	Are there any PWA projects in this Georgia breakdown?
Mr. Hopkins:	Not that I know of. There are one or two that ought to be taken out for other reasons.
Query:	The President said you would have charge of all projects under $25,000. Would you outline what they would be?
Mr. Hopkins:	That is classified in this statement. All projects under $25,000 go to WPA. On the other hand, in some instances, even though a project is under $25,000, it may go to PWA. It means that any sponsor that has a project under $25,000 knows he can bring it to us. In addition to that, there are other projects irrespective of the cost of the project—for instance, the City of New York may want to build a new park on one of those islands, which may cost three and one-half million dollars. That is a proper project to bring to us in the first instance which we would approve. They may want to build in New York City fifty swimming pools. That would be a proper project to bring to us irrespective of the cost. The same thing is true of playgrounds, also extensions, sewer systems, water systems or extensions to buildings. Many of those projects will be in excess of $25,000. We might have one which would read repairing and repaving of 27 miles of city streets in Los Angeles. The cost is $4,600,000 of which the City of Los Angeles is prepared to put up $800,000. That would go directly to us in the first instance.
Query:	Mr. Pierson lists a project of $23,000,000 as No. 1.
Mr. Hopkins:	He lists that as No. 1 project out of four billion dollars, He simply has it that it is the most important thing in Michigan that would be done by PWA.
Query:	He would get a 45% grant.
Mr. Hopkins:	That is right.
Query:	How would he raise the other 55%?
Mr. Hopkins:	It is a county project.
Query:	Then you go to Wayne County and have the people vote to raise the money.
Mr. Hopkins:	They have already voted it, I think.
Press:	They have not.
Query:	They can take it out of revenue bonds?
Mr. Hopkins:	There is nothing in the law to prohibit taking revenue bonds. That is right.
Query:	These projects you listed as Works Progress projects, like playgrounds, that is obviously because a large proportion of the cost would be for direct labor?
Mr. Hopkins:	Partly, and partly because no city or county I know of would issue bonds on that kind of thing. They might appropriate money, but they don't issue bonds.
Query:	How many projects are there in New York City?
Mr. Hopkins:	Hundreds of them. They are not classified under so many heads. I don't know offhand. There were 77 main headings of projects and a breakdown under a great many others.
Query:	There is another provision here I m not clear on. Where Ickes turns down a project it is then immediately submitted to WPA?
Mr. Hopkins:	For one reason or another Ickes might not want to do a project which he thinks is perfectly proper to be done. Suppose the Secretary decides he does not want to do any projects except on a 55-45% basis; suppose he runs into a city that cannot afford to borrow more than 35% of the money. He may want me to do it. There are a lot of reasons why these projects get into jams, as you know. This device is to see that these projects do not get caught and lost in the shuffle.
Query:	They automatically come to you if they are turned down?
Mr. Hopkins:	That is right.
Query:	Does that work the other way?
Mr. Hopkins:	It can be done. That is a matter of coordination,
Query:	Was the chief purpose to get projects over to you?
Mr. Hopkins:	The chief purpose is to get this thing clarified so that projects are not held up either here or over there.
Query:	Suppose a project goes to Ickes. He approves a 45% grant. He finds the city cannot finance the other 55%. Then it goes to you and is accepted by you. Then does the government assume the project 100%?
Mr. Hopkins:	It might. Potentially that is true. There is always a possibility.
Query:	We are still not clear about this thirty day thing. Does that mean that thirty days after an application has been submitted and not acted upon it automatically moves from one to the other?
Mr. Hopkins:	We would not hold a project.
Query:	You would send it to Mr. Ickes?
Mr. Hopkins:	Sure.
Query:	This works both ways?
Mr. Hopkins:	Sure, it will.
Query:	On a project that takes more than $25,000 but obviously belongs to you, do you expect the cities to put up a part of the money then?
Mr. Hopkins:	Whenever they ought to, we do.
Query:	Below $25,000, you will put it up?
Mr. Hopkins:	No, not necessarily.
Query:	How does this affect the cost per man?
Mr. Hopkins:	Not in any way.
Query:	Are projects under the PWA subject to the same limit?
Mr. Hopkins:	No. There is no individual project, one it a time, subject to any limitation. The whole thing is a matter of average. Obviously, McDonald cannot build grade crossings for $1100 a man and Ickes cannot build a power plant for anything like that, but that does not mean they are not going to be done. On the contrary; as a matter of fact, up to the present time none of those projects in big cities have been disapproved.
Query:	You get low ones of $600 to $700 to balance them?
Mr. Hopkins:	Yes.
Query:	How soon do you expect to get the program started in New York City?
Mr. Hopkins:	We have to get our actual hands on the cash. It is a matter of days.
Query:	Are you going to have more state allotments soon?
Mr. Hopkins:	Oh, yes, we have a schedule here of our state allotments.
Query:	What will be the procedure in Wisconsin?
Mr. Hopkins:	The same as everywhere else.
Query:	Will each project have to come in on separate applications"
Mr. Hopkins:	That is right. They all come through Immel. He represents me. When Immel signs his name, I have signed, We do not give those projects technical criticism here. That is done out in the field.
Query:	What will Frank Walker have to do?
Mr. Hopkins:	The same as now.
Query:	Frank is going to thumb them individually?
Mr. Hopkins:	No.
Query:	What is the status of street grade crossings?
Mr. Hopkins:	I don't know what the technical business is.
Query:	How about these farm-to-market roads?
Mr. Hopkins:	We are going to build them. That is one of the most important sections of this office—the building of those roads that do not come under the Federal State Highway grants; that is, bout two-thirds of the roads in America are not state highway subject to Federal funds and on those roads we are going to have a very extensive program and we are going to have technical people on our staff competent to build these roads,
Query:	I thought the State Highway Commissioners are going to spend this money?
Mr. Hopkins:	The State Highway Commissioners will spend funds provided under the Federal Highway Act—what is known as State highways and they submit a plan to McDonald. They do not spend money on a road unless it is designated as a state highway. We could not do work on a Federal state highway job.
Query:	Outside of your bookkeeping changes, have you any people actually at work under the new program?
Mr. Hopkins:	No, I have not. Obviously, we cannot put anybody to work until we get some dollars.
Query:	Who is going to release this?
Mr. Hopkins:	Well, we are going to release it soon; the exact number and where they are.
Query:	Will it run up to a million?
Mr. Hopkins:	Now? No.
Query:	The psychology in the public mind seems to be, first, that it is another CWA; secondly, the CWA was practically of little value. Will you discuss that?
Mr. Hopkins:	Yes, I would say this—that all our projects which the WPA will do, about one-half of them will be projects now being carried out under our on work program. That is, we will take over all the best of the projects, and see that enough money i6 put in for materials to make them the kind of projects that will stand up. Secondly, there is widespread misunderstanding about a lot of these big projects. There will be housing projects of substantial parts; from my point of view, the more the better, reclamation projects and other large projects like at.
Query:	Did you approve Central Valley?
Mr. Hopkins:	I cannot answer. Get that from Walker.
Press	Mr. Ickes is always telling us that.
Query:	How can we get to Walker?
Mr. Hopkins:	I guess he does not like to talk to you people.
Query:	Where can we get the state quota?
Mr. Hopkins:	You will not. What you will get are the projects as they are approved. I think you ought to wait until the project is approved by the President.
Query:	The law says the projects must be approved by the President?
Mr. Hopkins:	The Allotment Board may advise or recommend, but the President does not have to do it.
Query:	Hasn't he turned down any yet?
Mr. Hopkins:	Yes, several.
Query:	He said he hasn't.
Mr. Hopkins:	All right, then, he hasn't.
Query:	Have your research men tabulated allotments to see what the average will have to be on remaining projects?
Mr. Hopkins:	Yes.
Query:	What is it?
Mr. Hopkins:	I don't know offhand.
Query:	If employment is the prime consideration of every project, why is it that on the list of Presidential approvals, we are not told the number of men the project will put to work.
Mr. Hopkins:	I know of no reason why we should not tell you that. We can tell you that. After all, we are going to be out getting reports on every project as to how many people the sponsors said were going to be put to work.
Query:	Who is holding it up?
Mr. Hopkins:	Nobody. After all, we are just getting started. It is a WPA job to know how many men are at work on any of these projects.
Query:	How large a staff of investigators will you need to take on these projects?
Mr. Hopkins:	We will need a small staff of investigators. If you are talking about inspection, I have no idea. One inspector can inspect a lot of projects in one city.
Query:	Ten or more in each state?
Mr. Hopkins:	As far as I can find out, our total administrative cost, which would include this inspection, would be something under 3%.
Query:	I was not thinking of cost. I was talking of the number.
Mr. Hopkins:	I really do not know.
Query:	What about a successor to Mr. Haynes?
Mr. Hopkins:	He is appointed by the Governor, not by me.
Query:	Are you going to leave it to the Governor?
Mr. Hopkins:	I will talk to the Governor about it.
Query:	Can you tell us anything about Governor Talmadge yet?
Mr. Hopkins:	Yet? No.
Query:	Have you reached a decision at the White House?
Mr. Hopkins:	I wasn't there on anything about the Talmadge business.
Query:	What are your views on the subject of what ought to be done for the cities that have exhausted their borrowing power and cannot raise the money?
Mr. Hopkins:	Obviously, the government is not going to penalize any city that is broke. They are going to get their share as far as the four billion is concerned.
Query:	What about the criticism that Governor Johnson of Colorado made regarding Shriver?
Mr. Hopkins:	Shriver is an excellent man.
Query:	Have you any measuring rod as to what the cities should contribute on the basis of what you think the city should do?
Mr. Hopkins:	For instance, New York City borrows a lot from PWA and might be entitled to grants. There are a lot of factors in this thing.
Query:	What is the answer to the criticism of dealing leniently with the cities that are broke and strictly with those that have the ability to pay?
Mr. Hopkins:	There is no answer to that one. It is not always a matter of leniency. Sometimes it is a matter of where the city might be situated; that is, in what part of the country—like Detroit that has had a lot of business.
Query:	Are you going to keep politics out of this?
Mr. Hopkins:	Sure; bet your life.
Query:	On this Colorado situation, what experience did Shriver have? The Governor said he was not qualified.
Mr. Hopkins:	I might answer—what experience did the Governor have to qualify him for his job?
Query:	Ralph Immel has a couple of state jobs. Will he keep them and work for a nominal salary?
Mr. Hopkins:	We will work that out. He can do it legally. He is a very good man.
Query:	It will not have to be confirmed by the Senate?
Mr. Hopkins:	It depends on whether he is paid more than $5,000.
Query:	What do you pay the Works Progress Administrators?
Mr. Hopkins:	From $8,000 down to $4,000.
Query:	Can we get a list of those?
Mr. Hopkins:	Sure. We are going to release all salaries.
Query:	Have you been confirmed?
Mr. Hopkins:	I hear I have.
Press	Congratulations. At this point the conference adjourned. Reported By: Miss Valenza and Mrs. Bonaventura.