upon the Institute as a "national pathology center" — the Armed Forces and the Veterans' Administration — totaled 232,132 beds, while the corresponding figure for Federal agencies not utilizing the Institute as a central laboratory of pathology numbered only 23,469. "Since the greater proportion of the beds operated by the Federal government," he said, "are occupied by military or former military personnel, the responsibility of maintaining the collection of pathologic material for training and research is definitely within the military service.6[1]
Ten days later, on 13 February 1950, Mr. Lansdale G. Sasscer of Maryland, chairman of the subcommittee which had considered the subject, filed his committee's report recommending passage of H.R. 6539, a bill, introduced by Mrs. Frances P. Bolton of Ohio, which contained the amendatory material as H.R. 6478. One week later, on 20 February, Representative Bolton's bill was passed. In an extension of remarks in the Congressional Record, Mrs. Bolton expressed her appreciation to Chairman Vinson of the Committee on Armed Services for his courtesy in considering her bill, and went on to say: 7[2]
In modern medicine the Department of Pathology, the laboratory of any hospital or group of hospitals, is the heart of the facility. Accurate diagnosis and consequent treatment is largely dependent upon perfection of laboratory work.
The benefits to be derived from the change of location of the contemplated building have been recognized both by the Department of Defense and the Department of the Army. The fiscal advantage of the savings made possible as well as the value of the broader improvements involved has been given Bureau of the Budget approval. All three recommend passage of this bill.
Passed by the House, H.R. 6539 was sent to the Senate, where further hearings were held on 9 March 1950, with General Dart again appearing as the principal witness.
In answer to a question, General Dart gave an estimate of the final cost of the building, as revised and reduced, as "a little over $10,000,000." "This has been reduced $i,ooo,coo," he added, "as the result of an agreement with the Bureau of the Budget and the Director of Medical Services, in which we agreed to reduce certain of the facilities that we had originally planned, to integrate it into the program at Walter Reed that would have required an additional expense of $411,000 to expand facilities that are already overcrowded. So that with this agreement, the original estimate has been reduced a total of $1,000,000
