 It's time for the Laun Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Laun Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Laun Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Laun Jean. Good evening, this is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Laun Jean Chronoscope? Mr. William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury, and Colonel Ansel Talbert, an editor of the New York Herald Tribune. Our distinguished guest for this evening is Mr. Ty E. Woods, director of the Office of Rent Stabilization. The opinions expressed are necessarily those of the speakers. Mr. Woods, I'm sure that all of our listeners, who are either property owners or who rent property, will be delighted to have your views tonight. Now, recently, sir, Senator Dirksen was on this program, and he told our audience something about some proposed changes in the rent control law. Now, what are your views on the so-called Dirksen Amendment, sir? Well, Mr. Huey, I'm worried about the Dirksen Amendment because Mr. Senator Dirksen has said he will introduce it or propose it on the floor of the Senate when this bill comes up for consideration, because it's an amendment that does a lot more than it sounds like. Briefly, it's this. The Dirksen Amendment proposes to decontrol everything except a critical area. Now, this Dirksen Amendment is something that you expect. You expect a Senate fight on it about the second week in June. That's right, yes. And the Dirksen Amendment, Senator Dirksen is trying to take off some controls that you don't want taken off. That's right. If I may explain, under the Defense Production Act, as passed by Congress last August, Congress put in a very rather rigid, a rather narrow definition of a critical area. Very briefly, a critical area is one in which there has been defense activity or military activity since Korea. There must be an immigration of labor or military into that area. There has to be a housing shortage and rents in that area either have risen excessively or are threatening to rise excessively. Well, now, can you tell our audience just by way of explanation, what are critical areas under this definition? Well, you take an area like all some of the ones that were hit the papers about a year ago this time. Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, Camp Rocker, Alabama. Those are areas where we suddenly had a vast reactivation of military activity with very little housing. This amendment doesn't recommend the suspension of all controls, does it? No, no, but here's what's dangerous about it. Although those critical areas are very important, the major cities of the United States such as Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, St. Louis, almost all of your big cities have rent control because they have defense activity and they have a housing shortage, but they couldn't qualify under this very technical definition of a substantial in-migration of labor. So if this amendment should become law, those cities would suddenly find themselves without any rent control. Now, the Ducson amendment, Senator Ducson proposes to simply end controls except in all areas which are defined as critical. Which are designated as critical. And now you're opposing it for one reason because of this definition of a critical area. That's right, because of the one technicality that there has not in these major cities been a substantial in-migration of labor. How about New York? Has New York got a substantial in-migration of labor? No, but New York is a little different, Colonel. New York has its own rent control. It's under a state act. But there are some lawyers in Washington today who are constitutional law experts and this seems to be a time in Washington for a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking on what is constitutional and what isn't. Let's say that possibly New York could be affected because if cities like Chicago and Philadelphia went out, some people could say that, well, New York doesn't have a substantial in-migration of labor, therefore the New York law is unconstitutional. Now, as a spokesman for rent control, as the man who is charged with the responsibility for rent control, you're telling our audience that you think it's important that the Dirksen proposed Dirksen amendment be defeated. Very definitely. Now, Mr. Huey, if this was a vote on shall we or shall we not have federal rent control, that would be one thing. My fear in the case of this amendment is that it may not be understood that normally the confusion over the word critical to the normal person under hearing the word critical, they would assume that any city that had rent control because there was a housing shortage would be critical. But because of that very narrow definition, I don't like the wording of the amendment. Do you think our congressmen understand this subtle distinction, Mr. Wood? I hope they do. I certainly pray that they do because I think if they do, then they will make up their minds either they feel we should still have rent control as part of the stabilization effort or we shouldn't have. Now, sir, moving on to another subject, many of our listeners are, of course, apartment dwellers. Now, what is the general situation in apartment rents today? Are more apartments being built? Is there an easing of the apartment situation across the country? No, there isn't. Although we've had a tremendous amount of building in the last four years or the last almost five years now, most of it has been in homes for sale. I don't think in any one of those years did we exceed 15% of our residential construction for apartments for rent. Now, why have the builders stayed away, preferred to build homes rather than apartments? Well, when a builder builds a house for sale, he builds the house, the purchaser gets a mortgage, the builder gets his money, and he's out, then he can start on another one. Whereas in the construction of apartments, well, there are not so many buyers for big apartment builders, so those builders usually have to, their capital is tied up maybe for many, many years. So there hadn't been as many apartments constructed, definitely as many as we need. If an apartment dweller feels he's not getting the right deal on rent, just what does he do about it, Mr. Woods? Well, he has, if it's under federal rent control, as every city is except Washington and New York, he should go to his local rent office. There are certain rules and regulations. For example, he's supposed to only pay the legal ceiling rent. He's entitled to the essential services that go with that rent. If he's not getting the services, or if he's asked for more rent, he should go to his local rent office and complain. That's what it's there for. How has, how in general, so you've been in this business of controlling rents now for ten years, I believe, what is your general appraisal of the program? Has it saved people a great deal of money? Has it been fair? Yes, it's been fair. We've made mistakes. We've, as time has gone on, we've progressed. I would say that the rent control of today is great, is a lot different than the rent control of 1945-1946. We've made mistakes, and I won't say that every landlord hasn't had some hardship at one time or another, in that he's gotten, hasn't always gotten a good deal from the rent office. But the people who work for us are human. They make mistakes. The only thing we can do is when we find them, we try to correct them. Now, coming back to this apartment business, you say that one of the real needs in this country is more apartment construction. Very, very definitely, Bill, and particularly in the middle-income brackets. Now, we've had plenty of apartment construction in New York or Chicago in the high brackets. Today, in the city that I know best, because I grew up there and I was in the real estate business there, Chicago, well, if you can pay $200 a month rent, you can have a choice. But if you're one of those people who has to worry about a ceiling and what he can pay for rent of around $60 or $70, you have a tough job. That's the field that we haven't touched. Do you think that rent control is going to be with us for some time? I think, Colonel, I think it will be with us as long as this present mobilization effort is being carried on. Rent control today is tied up very definitely with a stabilization effort. And as long as we're in a mobilization program, we'll have rent control. Now, if you want to pin me down on a date on that, I'd say, well, others in that program have said it's got to go on until about the middle of 1954. I'd say rent control will go on at least that long. Do you think that housing construction will catch up with the country by that time? I don't know, I hope, because rent control isn't going to build any housing, and I'm the first to admit it. It's only a stop gap until we do get some housing. Now, Mr. Woods, you are what our audience knows as a bureaucrat, are you not? That's right. Well, now, can you tell us the size of your particular bureau? How many people do you employ? We have about 2800 people throughout the country. And how many dollars does it cost the taxpayers to operate your bureau? Around $13 million a year. And do you think that the taxpayers are getting their money's worth? Very definitely. Yes, I think they do. I think they have gotten their money's worth. And I don't think that landlords have too much to complain about either, because this may startle you, but I think that the real estate industry today is undergoing the greatest boom in its history. There are about 8 million rental property owners, aren't there, in the United States? That's considered a fair figure yet. Do you think that there's any incentive now to become a rental property owner in this country? Very definitely, because I think the returns on residential real estate because of the terrific demand, the shortage, makes it a very profitable business to be in spite of us bureaucrats. Well, thank you, Mr. Woods, very much for being with us. The editorial board for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Colonel Ansel Talbert. Our distinguished guest was Mr. Ty E. Woods, Director of the Office of Rents Stabilization. These glorious spring days are days of great events in many homes, as your favorite son or daughter prepares for graduation just ahead, or as preparations go forward for an important wedding, or as in many homes, plans are being made for the celebration of an anniversary. Now, to mark these happy events, many thousands are planning the purchase of a fine watch. If you are one of these, why not the world's most honored watch, Lawn Jean? The Lawn Jean watch offers much more than the little more it costs, for Lawn Jean, you should remember, is the only watch in history to win 10 World's Fair Grand Prizes and 28 Gold Medal Awards and highest honors for accuracy from the leading government observatories of the world. Yet you may buy and proudly give a Lawn Jean watch for as little as $71.50. For beauty, greater accuracy, a long and useful life, Lawn Jean watches are universally esteemed. For graduation, a wedding, an anniversary, for father on father's day, for any important gift occasion, truly no other name on a watch means so much as Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, premier product of the Lawn Jean Witner Watch Company since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday and Friday evening at this same time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important dishes of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Witner, distinguished companion to the world's honored Lawn Jean. This is Frank Knife reminding you that Lawn Jean and Witner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem, agency for Lawn Jean Witner watches. This is the CBS television network.