Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. RIVERS. That is right.

Mr. PHILBIN. That is right.

Mr. RIVERS. Justice delayed is justice defeated. That is right, isn't it?

Colonel BOYER. Yes, sir.

Mr. RIVERS. Now

Mr. Van Zandt.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. May I ask a question?

I am sorry I was detained in another committee meeting. But I would like to ask the question: Did we not pass a bill similar to this last year?

Mr. RIVERS. Yes. It didn't get through the Senate.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. And it didn't get through the Senate.

Mr. RIVERS. Is there any difference in this bill and the one we passed last year?

Mr. SLATINSHEK. No substantial difference. Actually, that bill is keyed to Public Law 810. This is keyed to title 10 as codified now. Mr. RIVERS. I see.

Any other questions by any other members of the committee? (No response.)

Mr. RIVERS. Thank you very much, General.

Colonel CARLTON. Thank you.

Mr. RIVERS. What is the pleasure of the committee? Do you want to sit here and try to get this thing out this afternoon?

Mr. MORRIS. I think we are all ready to pass it, except for that one serious question there, about whether or not we should include WAC. Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Well, Mr. Chairman, if I might speak to that question? Because I am very deeply interested in that particular portion of the bill.

I don't really believe that it is entirely germane to this piece of legislation, because, as I read it, this piece of legislation deals specifically with Reserves and with Reserve probems.

Mr. MORRIS. Pardon me for interrupting.

Would the gentlewoman yield?

I am not insisting on it.

It deals with Reserves, but Reserves only as to some people. Mrs. ST. GEORGE. I am just as anxious as the gentleman is, certainly, to see that injustice is rectified. I don't want to belabor it.

Mr. MORRIS. Would the gentlewoman yield for just another moment?

I am just as anxious as all of you. I don't want to belabor it. It is probably not wise to put it in here. But I do want to make this correction. This bill does refer to Reserves except for certain types that are Regulars.

Mr. RIVERS. Let's do this

Mr. MORRIS. It does include some Regulars. Regular nurses get included.

Mr. RIVERS. Let's direct our counsel

Mr. VAN ZANDT. What we are talking about, we feel that this committee has been denied a piece of legislation that should have been referred to it, and that is curing the deficiency of not authorizing as WAC credit for service when it was the WAAC.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. That is right.

Mr. RIVERS. I think it is the unanimous feeling of the committee that we request the chairman to refer that bill to this subcommittee. And Mr. Slatinshek, without objection, we will direct you to tell the chairman that and tell him it is the unanimous feeling of this committee.

Mr. BRAY. Why not have the committee visit him?

Mr. RIVERS. We will visit him.
How many on this committee?

Mr. SLATINSHEK. Eleven, sir.

Mr. RIVERS. Tell him 11 members requested that we get that bill before this committee.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. All right, sir.

As a matter of information, during the hearings on this bill that you had reference to, Mr. Van Zandt, this subject did come up, and the bill, as reported out by the committee, did not contain the WAC

Mr. VAN ZANDT. I remember. I recall last year.

Mr. BRAY. It was referred to another subcommittee.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. In other words, there is a deficiency in this legis lation, and it was attributed to the fact that we did not include the WAC.

Mr. RIVERS. I would like or if you want to, I could appoint myself and two or three members or you all to talk to the chairman. It doesn't make any difference to me.

Mr. MORRIS. I think the first suggestion is good.

Mr. RIVERS. Let's do it. Then if it doesn't

Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Chairman, if last year it was judged to be a deficiency in the legislation that the WAC were not included in this bill, maybe we should think that over a second time.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. Mr. Chairman.

Actually, the House did pass the bill.
Mrs. ST. GEORGE. But without-

Mr. SLATINSHEK. Without the WAC included.

Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Yes.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. So the House presumably felt that it was adequate under the circumstances. I don't want to give the impression that it was considered inadequate.

Mr. RIVERS. Of course, the House has changed quite a bit since last year.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. Yes, sir.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. If my memory serves me correctly, we considered this problem of the WAC. We found it to involve some money. Also, controversy was attached to it. We felt that we should get this bill out and get it through the House and look at this WAC problem separately.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. Yes, sir.

Mr. RIVERS. That is what Colonel Carlton has suggested.

Mr. BRAY. The Department of Defense sent it up, but for some reason it is not before this subcommittee.

Mr. RIVERS. I think if we can get the chairman to assign this to us, we can go into all the facets of the effect of that proposed legislation and have a full-scale hearing.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Chairman, again drawing on my memory, we felt that we were going to establish a precedent. It would not only be the WAC but it would be other elements that supported the military, like field clerks, and so forth.

We found ourselves becoming involved in an area of a lot of controversy.

Mr. BRAY. Certain people injected rather an artificial situation, as

you are aware.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Yes.

Mr. PHILBIN. I think we have to be considerate about the rule of germaneness. We have to consider that, and also the jurisdiction of the committee.

Mrs. ST. GEORGE. I think that is the main point.

Mr. PHILBIN. I think the suggestions that are made here are admirable, and I should think they could be worked out.

I would like very much to make the move that we approve the bill and report it favorably to the full committee.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. With the four amendments?

Mr. PHILBIN. With the four amendments to be worked out by Mr. Slatinshek.

Mr. SLATINSHEK. Yes, sir.

Mr. RIVERS. You heard the motion of the gentleman from

Mr. PHILBIN. And also the amendments recommended by the Defense Department and the other amendments, subject, of course, to the perfection of draftsmanship, which we always insist upon. Mr. RIVERS. That is right. We do that all the time.

You heard the motion of the gentleman from Massachusetts, that this bill be favorably reported to the full committee, subject to the confirmation of these technical suggestions by our distinguished counsel and a representative of the Judge Advocate General. And have him contact our counsel right away.

Colonel EGGLETON. Yes, sir.

Mr. RIVERS. Without objection, the bill will be favorably reported to the full committee, with those stipulations.

That is all there is on that.

Thank you, Colonel.

The committee will meet at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 4:10 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Friday, February 20, 1959.)

[blocks in formation]

SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 3 CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3367, TO AMEND TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE, BY REPEALING SECTION 7474, WHICH GRANTS TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY THE AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH RATES OF WAGES FOR CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF NAVAL ACTIVITIES

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES,
SUBCOMMITTEE No. 3,

Washington, D.C., Tuesday, February 17, 1959.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, in room 304, House Office Building, at 10 a.m., Hon. L. Mendel Rivers (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. RIVERS. I will ask the committee to come to order.

This is our first meeting in the new Congress and the first meeting of the committee under my chairmanship.

I am sorry we don't have a larger membership this morning because of the importance of the bills to be considered.

The majority of the consideration of this committee will be on Reserve matters. I haven't had as intensive background as that of my distinguished ranking Republican member and the other members of the committee because of the fact I have been on another committee, Mr. Kilday's committee.

But with the help of the membership of the committee and the patience of the representatives of the Reserve organizations-National Guard and Reserve-we will do the best we can.

There is one thing you will see in this committee, though; you will see some decisions made, and fast. We are not going to work like sewing machines, we are going to have hearings and take action. With no reflection on the past chairman, because that is what he did, we will try to do as well as he did, if humanly possible.

The first bill scheduled for consideration this morning is H.R. 3367. ' Without objection, H.R. 3367 will appear in the record at this point. (H.R. 3367 follows:)

A BILL To amend title 10, United States Code, by repealing section 7474, which grants to the Secretary of the Navy the authority to establish rates of wages for certain employees of naval activities

[ocr errors]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That chapter 643 of title 10, United States Code, is amended as follows:

(1) By repealing section 7474; and

(2) By striking out the following item in the analysis thereof:

"7474. Wage rates: establishment."

Mr. RIVERS. This was introduced at the request of Mr. Vinson. This bill would authorize repeal of an existing section in title 10 of the United States Code which provides the Department of the Navy with authority to establish wage rates for unclassified employees at naval activities.

The Department of the Navy has indicated that this authority is unnecessary since similar authority is provided all Departments of

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »