Page images
PDF
EPUB

That he is to be commended for his attention to duty and conspicuous ability in the field of military legislation, both as a member of the Military Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee;

That in the future the committee will sorely miss his great ability and wise counsel, but congratulates him on his selection as chairman of the House Committee on Science and Astronautics;

That the chairman of the Armed Services Committee be, and he hereby is authorized, to take appropriate steps to have this resolution made a part of the Congressional Record.

The CHAIRMAN. Members of the committee, all of you know that for 22 years the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana was a member of the Military Affairs Committee and of the Armed Services Committee.

He has rendered most outstanding service during the years he served on both committees. We will miss him from the Armed Services Committee. But he has assumed a great responsibility in becoming chairman of the House Science and Astronautics Committee. I deem it nothing but right and proper that we, from our hearts, express to him our appreciation of his outstanding service, as set forth in the resolution.

Without objection, the resolution is agreed to.

Now, members of the committee, that officially organizes the committee. We are ready for business, which will commence on the 26th day of January, next Monday.

Lying on each member's desk-now listen to this. This is important. Lying on each member's desk is a codification of the draft law and a down-to-earth explanation of each section.

Now we are going to have a hearing commencing Monday on this bill. So you can refresh your memory about what the law is. That is the reason I have had it prepared for you.

So study this law, that is, see what it does and know all about it when you come back here Monday morning, and we will open the hearings.

We can't do business unless there is a quorum. We have 37 members. How many members constitute a quorum?

Mr. SMART. Nineteen.

The CHAIRMAN. Nineteen. Now we must have at least 19 men here at 10 o'clock when the committee meets so we can do business, and that is public business you are taking up. So let's everyone try to arrange affairs so he can be here when the committee meets. Thank you very much, members of the committee. (Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the committee adjourned.)

о

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

FULL COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2260, TO EXTEND UNTIL JULY 1, 1963, THE INDUCTION PROVISIONS OF THE UNIVERSAL MILITARY TRAINING AND SERVICE ACT; THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 3, 1950, SUSPENDING PERSONNEL STRENGTHS OF THE ARMED FORCES; AND THE DEPENDENTS ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1950

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, Washington, D.C., Monday, January 26, 1959. The committee met at 10 a.m., the Honorable Carl Vinson (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. Let the committee come to order.

Now, members of the committee, the purpose of the hearing this morning is to consider H.R. 2260, the bill that is known as the Extension of the Universal Military Training Act. And that bill also deals with the extension of three other laws. The bill is as follows: A BILL To extend until July 1, 1963, the induction provisions of the Universal Military Training and Service Act; the provisions of the act of August 3, 1950, suspending personnel strengths of the Armed Forces; and the Dependents Assistance Act of 1950 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 17 (c) of the Universal Military Training and Service Act, as amended (50 App. U.S.C. 467 (c)), is amended by striking out the words "July 1, 1959" and inserting the words "July 1, 1963" in place thereof.

SEC. 2. Section 1 of the Act of August 3, 1950, chapter 537, as amended (71 Stat. 208), is amended by striking out the words "July 1, 1959" and inserting the words “July 1, 1963" in place thereof.

SEC. 3. Section 16 of the Dependents Assistance Act of 1950, as amended (50 App. U.S.C. 2216), is amended by striking out the words "July 1, 1959" and inserting the words "July 1, 1963” in place thereof.

SEC. 4. Section 9 of the Act of June 27, 1957, Public Law 85-62 (71 Stat. 208), is repealed.

With your indulgence, I would like to make a statement with reference to the bill. And I have had a copy of this statement laid on each one of your desks, so you may follow what I have to say. It might be at least I hope it will be of some aid and benefit to you in considering the matter in hearing.

Members of the committee, we meet this morning to begin hearings on the most important bill that will be considered by our committee during this session.

This is the bill to extend the draft law. It is an administration bill and it is on the administration's must list.

As far as I am concerned, we have no choice in the matter but to extend the draft. It is the right and proper thing to do. I hope there will be no hesitancy on the part of any member of the committee to meet his responsibility in this regard.

[blocks in formation]

The draft law not only inducts individuals involuntarily but of greater significance is the fact that because of the draft law, thousands of young men each year volunteer for service in our Armed Forces. I am convinced that without the draft law, this voluntary enlistment rate would suffer a great reduction.

Now I would like to tell you something about the history of this law. In 1940 the Congress enacted the Selective Service Act. This law expired in March of 1947. Then, in June of 1948, we reenacted the Selective Service Act, and we have had a draft act ever since. In other words, we have had a draft law continuously since 1940, except for a 17-month period between March of 1947 and June of 1948.

The 1948 draft law which was then known as the Selective Service Act of 1948, and has since been renamed the Universal Military Training and Service Act was enacted by the Congress at the request of President Truman, who delivered a message to the Congress on March 17, 1948, calling for the prompt increase in the standing military forces of the United States.

Back in March of 1948, before the reenactment of the 1948 Selective Service Act, and after extensive recruiting efforts on the part of the armed services, our Military Establishment reached a total of 1,384,500 men. It is of interest to note that on March 1, 1948, the Army was 129,000 men below its authorized strength of 669,000, and was facing a greater decline because of the failure to obtain increased volunteer enlistments.

In President Truman's message of March 1948, he said:

Our Armed Forces lack the necessary men to maintain their authorized strength. They have been unable to maintain their authorized strength through voluntary enlistments even though such strength has been reduced to the very minimum necessary to meet our obligations abroad and is far below the minimum which should always be available in the continental United States.

Now in those days we were talking about increasing our strength from 1,384,000 to 2 million men. And it required a draft law to accomplish this objective. Today we are talking about a force in excess of 22 million men. So it must be obvious that if we had difficulty in maintaining a force of 1,384,000 in 1948 and found it impossible to go to 2 million men on a voluntary basis, that the problem would be compounded today if we attempted to maintain a force of 212 million men on a voluntary basis.

We reenacted the draft law in 1948 and we have had the draft law ever since.

There is probably no law on the statute books that is closer to the American people than the draft law. American boys are affected by this law and almost every family has a son or relative who has been exposed, in one form or another, to military service.

I think I speak for all of us when I say that we would like to see the day arrive when the draft is no longer necessary. But it is perfectly obvious to anyone who studies this problem that the draft is indispensable to our security. We have passed many laws to improve the careers of service personnel and to stimulate reenlistments. Those laws have been successful and our reenlistment rates have increased. But those laws basically are aimed at retaining trained, experienced men in our Armed Forces. We still must fill the gap between the trained specialists and the men who do the everyday jobs so vital to the maintenance of our national security. These are the

seamen in our Navy; the infantry men in our Army divisions; the marines of our ready forces in the Marine Corps; and the airmen who keep our planes in the skies.

Now there are some people who express the hope that the draft law can be changed in certain respects. They feel that possibly the maximum age of liability can be reduced from age 26 to 24. And there are some who think that the chances of being drafted are so slim that the draft law should be drastically revised.

Well, my studies reveal that in 1958, of the total number of registrants attaining the age of 26, 9 out of 10 of the qualified registrants were serving on active duty or had completed their military obligation; 7 out of 10 of all registrants, including those not qualified, had either completed their military obligation or were in the process of completing their military obligation.

My study also indicates that by 1963, 55 percent of all registrants at age 26 will have fulfilled their military obligation or will be in the process of fulfilling their obligation; 8 out of 10 qualified registrants at age 26 will have fulfilled their military obligation or will be in the process of fulfilling their military obligation.

So after studying this problem carefully, I have concluded, and I think you will all agree from these figures, that we cannot reduce the draft age and that the chances of being drafted, or of fulfilling a military obligation in our Armed Forces, are substantially greater than some would have us believe.

Now the question will be asked: "How is this possible in view of the substantial manpower pool and in view of the fact that we only drafted 138,000 men in 1958, and are expected to draft about 100,000 in 1959 ?"

Well, I think we must bear in mind that, on the average, over 500,000 men a year enter the Armed Forces either as inductees, as 6-months' trainees, or as voluntary recruits in one of the Armed Forces.

In addition, draft boards are not drafting fathers and this, of course, increases the deferment rate to a considerable extent. Fathers are either classified as 1-A and available but placed in a low priority so that they are not reached, or they are classified as 3-A and deferred for hardship reasons.

I think most of us will agree that whenever it is possible we should not draft fathers. So long as there are sufficient number of nonfathers available in the manpower pool, we should take those individuals before inducting fathers.

We must keep in mind that when a father is inducted into the Armed Forces the impact upon his local community is greater than if a nonfather is inducted. The induction of fathers is bound to increase hardships throughout the country. And from a practical viewpoint, and because of the Dependents Assistance Act, it is obviously less expensive to the Government to induct nonfathers than to induct fathers.

Today we defer college students. I think we will all agree that this is a wise policy.

Now, while there are not a great number of people in college who are over the age of 24, nevertheless there are some who would be affected by a reduced draft age because local boards certainly are not

« PreviousContinue »