Mr. KILDAY. How many of those do you fear would be affected by the amendment that the chairman has proposed? Mr. JOHNSTON. There are a great many younger doctors that we have in internship that have currently been appointed in the Public Health Service commissioned corps to serve their obligatory service to the Government under the current draft law. Now I would say there might be involved currently maybe 400, sir. The CHAIRMAN. We have to make an exception, then, to the Public Health Service. Mr. KILDAY. Wouldn't you have the same situation with doctors in other services? Mr. BLANDFORD. No, sir; because they would be members of the Armed Forces. Of course, if they did get out after 6 months, you can keep them in the Armed Forces by law, but you can't keep them in the Public Health Service by law. Mr. KILDAY. Of course, if he did 6 months he would be through. Mr. BLANDFORD. If the services let them go after 6 months, the services have only themselves to blame. Mr. KILDAY. Suppose he is not a doctor and is an enlisted man. Mr. BLANDFORD. The whole point of the 6 months' provision, Mr. Kilday, is that any person who can convince the Secretary of Defense that he ought to be allowed out of the service prior to the completion of 24 months of service must have a pretty good reason for getting out. Mr. KILDAY. I don't raise the point, but I just want to make sure that the proposal has been coordinated with the doctors' draft. Mr. BLANDFORD. Well, the doctors' draft is a different situation. Because they are special registrants under that law. Mr. RIVERS. Of course, they have dentists, they have veterinarians, and they have other technically skilled people. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Doctor. We appreciate your bringing that to our attention. Admiral PRICE. Thank you very much, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Now the next witness is General Walsh. Come around, General. General WALSH. Thank you, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Now, General, you didn't ask to be heard, but I noticed your presence here and I knew that indicated you wanted me to call on you. So go right ahead now. Have you a statement you want to make? General WALSH. Yes, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, since I saw the chairman looking at me, I ran out this noon and prepared a statement [laughter] of a page and a quarter which with your permission, I will file for the record. (The document referred to is as follows:) STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. ELLARD A. WALSH, PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL GUARD ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES, WITH RESPECT TO H. R. 3005 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as always, we are grateful to you for the opportunity to express our comments with respect to legislation pertaining to our Armed Forces. To those familiar with past history, it is obvious that present world conditions dictate that the United States maintain armed forces over and beyond the numbers which could be acquired through voluntary enlistment alone. During such periods, it has been our traditional policy to selectively induct young men into our Armed Forces in the numbers required to meet the deficiency. We, therefore, concur in the provisions of H. R. 3005 which extends the authority for induction under the provisions of the Universal Military Training and Service Act to July 1, 1959. We further heartily endorse the two amendments which the chairman of the committee has proposed. Both of these amendments are equitable and clearly specify the intent of the Congress with respect to two points that may be in doubt. We also concur in the extension of the provisions of the Dependents Assistance Act of 1950 to July 1, 1959, as provided in section 2 of the bill. To do less would create extreme hardship for many enlisted members with dependents now serving in our Armed Forces. The Dependents Assistance Act of 1950 is rightfully applicable to enlisted members of the active Armed Forces and does not apply to members of the Reserve components during periods of active duty for training. However, because of the enactment of the Dependents Assistance Act, enlisted members of the Reserve components still receive quarters allowances at the same rate as originally set forth in the Career Compensation Act of 1949, even though officers' quarters allowances were increased by 14 percent in the Armed Forces Pay Raise Act of 1952. We, therefore, will propose a commensurate increase in the quarters allowance for enlisted members during the hearings on H. R. 2607. General WALSH. And orally, I would like to say that the Army and Air National Guard and the National Guard Association support the extension of the Selective Service Act and the Dependents Act of 1950 for the reasons stated. But we would like particularly to say that we support the amendments which the chairman outlined this morning and notably the amendment dealing with the age of 35 years in the Army and Air National Guard. We contend that the law does not so provide and that it was never the intent of Congress to impose a 17- or 18-year obligation on anybody. The CHAIRMAN. That is right. General WALSH. It is unrealistic. As the chairman pointed out, it is unduly harsh. And certainly, it is un-American, since these men, if they take advantage of the law and enlist in the Army and Air National Guard, will have served 8 years or more and thus have satisfied the 8-year obligation anyway. If they wish to remain involuntarily after 26 years of age, that is their business. So we hope the amendment, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, will prevail. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, General. I appreciate that. I did not know, in all frankness and candor, that the general was going to address himself to that. Mr. SHORT. [Aside.] The CHAIRMAN. No. I knew we would get some good suggestions from the general on any subject he addresses the committee on. Thank you. Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman The CHAIRMAN. One minute. General WALSH. Thank you, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Is there anyone here from the American Legion? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Come around, Mr. Kennedy. I thought I recognized the commander of the American Legion in the committee room this morning. Is he still here? Mr. KENNEDY. No; he wasn't here this morning. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, you met him yesterday afternoon. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Have you any statement you want to make in regard to House bill under consideration by the committee? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, Mr. Chairman. My name is Miles Kennedy. I am the legislative director of the American Legion. I have a statement in the name of our national commander, Mr. Seaborn P. Collins. With your permission, I would like to have it incorporated in the record, with the same force and effect as though it were made by the commander in person. (The document referred to is as follows:) STATEMENT OF SEABORN P. COLLINS, NATIONAL COMMANDER OF THE AMERICAN LEGION Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, the American Legion is grateful to you for extending to its representative the courtesy of expressing to you its views upon the extension of the existing Selective Service System. In the foreseeable future it will be necessary for the United States to maintain Armed Forces of a size never before necessary in the peacetime history of our country. This is a statement of fact that no responsible agency of the Government and apparently no individuel in Government controverts. Equally uncontroverted scems to be the proposition that the necessary manpower for these adequate Armed Forces cannot be procured without compulsory service and without the necessary machinery through which the individuels so serving can be selected and inducted into the Armed Forces. In 1940 the Selective Service System was set up for just this purpose. Its fair and efficient operation has led to the acceptance of that system without any serious criticism and certainly without any suggestion of any other system to replace it. It enjoys the confidence of the vast majority of the American public. This confidence has been gained by its having been tested in World War II and in the Korean conflict. It has stood the test of peacetime conditions as well as those of war. At present the Selective Service System has 5,575 full-time paid employees and approximately 42,000 patriotic civilians who donate their time without compensation to the Government and who even bear certain items of personal expense in rendering this loyal service. Among these civilians are the outstanding citizens of every community. They are organized into 3,912 boards, 1 in every county, city, or comparable subdivision. To set up such an organization requires much time and many thousands of dollars. There is no plan in prospect that would or could carry out the duties of the Selective Service System. Even were there such a plan, time would not permit its organization and implementation. The American Legion hopes that the 84th Congress will enact into law a program which will place the main reliance of our Nation for military strength upon Organized Reserve units rather than upon large professional Armed Forces, and that such a plan will grow into a universal training program as world conditions permit and as economic conditions and logistic considerations allow. However, even in the event of implementation of a universal training program, there must always be some machinery such as the Selective Service System to select the time, place and identity of those to take the training. The Legion also believes that in the event of a universal training program there will exist a large pool of unattached reservists and that the Selective Service System is the proper agency to select from this pool the individuals to be recalled when emergency shall have made such recall necessary. The American Legion believes that selective service is not a complete nor the best answer to the problem of maintaining the strength of the Armed Forces, and that our Nation should look to the time when a universal training program will supply all needed manpower. However, during the changeover period the Selective Service System should be used concurrently in selection for the training corps and induction into the Armed Forces. Depending upon the type of Reserve training program that the 84th Congress may provide, a 4-year extension of the Selective Service System with its present organization and powers should be sufficient for this changeover period. If it be conceded that the necessary strength of our Armed Forces cannot be maintained without a system of compulsory service, there is no choice other than to extend the existing Selective Service System. Mr. KENNEDY. Needless to say, we are supporting the legislation under consideration. The CHAIRMAN. Good. Mr. KENNEDY. That is all I have to say, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Now members of the committee Mr. BROOKS. Miles, do you want to make a statement in your own way? Mr. KENNEDY. No, sir. This covers it very fully, Mr. Brooks. The CHAIRMAN. Now members of the committee, I know of no other one that has indicated a desire to be heard today. But tomorrow, we will have several witnesses who have written to the committee stating they desire to appear in opposition to the extention of the draft bill. So I ask all of you to try to be here at 10 o'clock. We will take a recess until 10 o'clock in the morning. (Whereupon, at 2:45 p. m., the committee adjourned to reconvene at 10 a. m., the following day, Wednesday, February 2, 1955.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee met at 10 a. m., Hon. Carl Vinson (chairman) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. Let the committee come to order. This is a continuation of the hearing on the extension of the draft law. I understand that Colonel Boyer desires to submit a statement. The colonel will hand it to the reporter, and we will be glad to accept his statement. Colonel BOYER. Mr. Chairman, this is C. M. Boyer, executive director of the Reserve Officers Association. We are in full accord with the committee in extending the Draft Act, and I would like to put this statement in the record. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Colonel. Colonel BOYER. Yes, sir. (The statment is as follows:) STATEMENT BY C. M. BOYER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, CONCERNING H. R. 3005 I am C. M. Boyer, the executive director of the Reserve Officers Association. We appreciate, as always, the courtesy of the committee in permitting us to testify on H. R. 3005. The association heartily supports the enactment of this proposed legislation. It is obvious that world conditions are forcing our country to maintain the force levels of our active military forces at such a level that they cannot be supported by voluntary enlistments. We are proud of the many young Americans who volunteer for duty with all the military services. This is, of course, in the best tradition of our American way of life. However, it is our sincere belief that our voluntary-enlistment rate will decline sharply unless there remains the compulsion of a draft law which offers only the alternative of induction to most individuals. The recruiting campaigns of the services would never have been so successful but for the compulsive effect of the present law. If there were not before the present Congress a new national Reserve plan, which we understand will soon be considered by your committee, we would suggest amendments to the present law in order to require the services to use this law as a means of building up the Reserves. It long has been our contention that the Reserves could have been built up, had the authority in the present law vigorously been used by the Department of Defense. However, these issues will be met in the hearings on the new Reserve plan, and therefore we are not offering an amendment at this time. If, perchance, the Reserve bill is not enacted into law-and we certainly hope that this does not occur-then we will ask the Congress to amend the present draft law. Similarly, we would have suggested language concerning the ROTC graduates who are in excess of the force-level requirements of the active forces. These young officers are trained and commissioned to provide our officer force for full mobilization. In the case of the Air Force, ROTC graduates in excess of activeduty requirement were not even ordered to active duty as officers, except under certain restrictive conditions. The other services have forced more experienced and more qualified officers off their rolls in order to provide slots for the ROTC graduates. Here again, however, we believe that this is a matter for inclusion in the Reserve legislation, and we therefore are not offering an amendment to this bill at this time. For the record, we do raise the question as to why this bill is only being extended for an additional 4 years. It would be our thought that it would, perhaps, be more appropriate and present a more consistent national posture in this field if it were made permanent legislation. If circumstances warrant, the Congress could always repeal the authority. However, if in the wisdom of Congress this extension terminating on July 1, 1959, is deemed to be all that is necessary, then the association accepts their judgment without question. Insofar as section 2 of the bill is concerned, there is a point that we would like to bring out. We agree that the Dependents Assistance Act of 1950, as amended, should be extended. There is an inequity, however, that exists at the present time because enlisted Reservists receive a quarters allowance while on periods of active duty for training which is less than that received by Regular enlisted personnel working alongside them. This is because the Dependents Assistance Act apparently does not cover Reservists on active duty for training, and they are paid under the Career Compensation Act, as amended, at the rates contained in the original version of that bill. When the pay of military personnel was increased in 1952, the pay of enlisted personnel was not increased because it was pointed out that the Dependents Assistance Act already provided for them. The allowances were increased but it appears that the interpretation of this act has precluded such increased rates for training duty. We suggest to the committee that this item should be considered when the military-pay bill is studied by your committee, and we therefore offer no amendment to the Dependents Assistance Act at this time. Thank you for the opportunity of having testified, and we sincerely trust that the bill, as introduced, will be enacted. The CHAIRMAN. Now, members of the committee, we have this morning one or our distinguished colleagues who has introduced a bill to offer an amendment to a portion of the draft law, Mr. Hinshaw, of California. We will be glad to have him make any statement he desires to as to the proposed amendment as set out in his bill. Mr. Hinshaw, the committee will be delighted to hear you this morning. STATEMENT BY HON. CARL HINSHAW, A UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE 20TH DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, my name is Carl Hinshaw, and I represent the 20th Congressional District of California in this body and have for a good many years. I think before I present my statement I would like to offer four sections of certain newspapers, indicating or carrying advertising in considerable quantities concerning positions which are not only open but for which fillers for those positions are very avidly sought after by the various employers, prospective. I would like to offer |