how are we going to go about this.

This is sort of an outside maximum figure, I agree, and I should have so qualified more clearly in the statement.

Mr. ROGERS. I understand that but that is the thing I do not like, is these scare figures. I would have, a whole lot rather have the truth and the facts about the thing and recommendations from people who are familiar with it, and certainly you folks have gone into it very thoroughly and I think it would be most helpful and most valuable if you could help us out along those lines.

Mr. SITTLER. I wonder if this statement on page 2 under "Economies in the Veterans' Administration"-that is in your reportmight give, put a little light on that subject. I understand that the original task force urged the discontinuance of branch offices and estimated that it would render 5,100 persons surplus; is that right? Mr. MCCORMICK. Yes, sir.

Mr. SITTLER. When they were eliminated, there were actually 5,600 people surplus and those jobs were eliminated, is that right? Mr. MCCORMICK. Yes, sir. That is very close.

Mr. SITTLER. So that you actually underestimated the savings to be made if your recommendations were followed.

Mr. MCCORMICK. Yes, sir. It is kind of give or take 20 percent on that sort of an operation.

Mr. SITTLER. And is it not also true that your primary aim is not against any certain number of employees, but against the confused flow of mail and traffic and authority within the Veterans' Administration, and if you eliminate that, the employee situation will take care of itself. If I have to deal with Congressman Ayres over there to get something done, but my mail has first to go to Congressman Rogers and to Adair and then to the chairman and then back to me twice and then to Congressman Teague and finally over to Congressman Ayres, there is an awful lot of money and time spent in accomplishing transaction that should be taken care of between the two Is that not the burden of most of your effort?

of us.

Mr. McCORMICK. That is correct, and it takes on the part of any private or public enterprise-it takes eternal vigilance on the part of the management to stop that sort of thing from happening.

Mr. TEAGUE. All right, Mr. McCormick. Thank you very much, sir.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM ADAIR GOSSETT, VICE PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Mr. GOSSETT. My name is William Adair Gossett. I am a vice president of the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce. My home is in Carlsbad, N. Mex., where I operate my own business. Today I am privileged to present the official position of the United States Junior Chamber on H. R. 3316 and H. R. 3686, and H. R. 3317 and H. R. 3677, bills to implement certain veterans' affairs recommendations of the Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Mr. Gossett, will you go ahead and read as much of your statement as you want to and insert the rest of it in the record, if you desire, and comment on it, and answer questions and so forth.

Mr. TEAGUE. Before you go further, will you tell us how the official position was arrived at by the Jaycees?

Mr. GOSSETT. Yes; I will tell you.

Mr. TEAGUE. The reason why I ask you, of course, is that we find organizations of 100,000 and one man arrives at a decision. We would like to know generally and how many and what percent of this 100,000 Jaycees took part in it and how much they know about it.

Mr. GOSSETT. Colonel Teague, I think it might come out in the latter part of the statement and I will be glad to go into it at a later time.

Mr. TEAGUE. Go ahead, that is right.

Mr. GOSSETT. On behalf of over 150,000 fellow Jaycees throughout the 48 States, Hawaii and Alaska, may I express our sincerest appreciation for this opportunity to testify. Nearly 85 percent of our membership are veterans of World War II or the Korean conflict. Of this number many, like myself, were wounded. We are, therefore, largely an organization of veterans who have experienced Federal veteran benefits first hand.

Very clearly right here I want to state that the United States Junior Chamber of Commerce does not favor reducing Federal benefits to veterans or their dependents. On the contrary, our interest in the present legislation comes from a firm conviction that these bills will improve service to veterans and their dependents, and at the same time enable the Veterans' Administration to operate more efficiently and economically.

The Jaycees have supported the Hoover report since 1949. This was a departure from a 30-year tradition of working primarily on the local community level. We took this step because we believe the reorganization plan, to quote former President Herbert Hoover, "would reach into every American home with some beneficial results." We now observe that the Hoover Commission recommendations, where enacted, have proved Mr. Hoover was right. This is one of the strongest arguments for adopting the balance of the recommendations, including those being considered here today.

Our decision to concentrate upon the veterans' affairs recommendations was made last fall. During the previous 2 years, while talking to people about the Hoover report in general, we noticed that most veterans knew very little about its effect upon veterans' services. Where they did have opinions, they were frequently based on misinformation and not facts. Here was an issue of great personal interest to veterans and their families, today and in the future. Here was something we could speak about from experience, something very close to many of us personally. Late subsistence checks, delayed correspondence, lost records, and such experiences have been an old story to many veterans. We really did not need an expert management study to tell us something was wrong with the VA. A speedy VĂ transaction was almost a novelty.

The Jaycees, along with all citizens interested in good government, are sincerely grateful to the Congress for finding out why the VA was inefficient and how a Government bureau could give good, economical services. As opposed to vague public statements about how bureaucrats were trying to do a good job but were bogged down by red tape and duplication, the Hoover Commission turned out an expert report which was concrete, sensible, and constructive. This report on

veterans' affairs was something in which veterans could have confidence. It was objective. Distinguished Americans and prominent veterans prepared it. It was based on study by one of the finest management firms in the country.

Since 1949 a lot of things have been written and said about this report, for and against. We carefully examined all such information we could find because we well knew the importance of this stand, and we had to be firmly convinced that we were right. After studying this material and considering the qualifications of those who prepared it, we concluded that the Hoover Report on Veterans' Affairs would benefit veterans and their dependents.

The opinions of the Hoover report's opponents were most carefully studied, especially the points which the larger veterans' organizations emphasized. The Jaycees have great respect for these groups. We believe most of their programs are of great value to the veterans and our Nation; many of us, including myself, are members. Certainly we sympathize with their concern for veterans' welfare; however, in this instance we were forced to disagree with them. We did not believe in this case they were acting in the best interests of either the veterans or our country. The Hoover report was a management study, based on scientific, expert research. It dealt with internal organization and, as far as we could find, the veterans' groups had no such detailed managerial investigation to support their conclusions. Particularly, the Jaycees could find no basis in fact for the frequent charges that benefits would be decreased.

Next, we considered what the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs had to say about the Hoover report. At the same time, we took into account the understandable reaction of any official whose operations were being criticized. The Administrator could hardly be an impartial judge of his own agency. Moreover, events subsequent to the Hoover Commission's investigation, particularly those reported by Congressman Teague's select committee, indicated that the Administrator was not right in his blanket opposition to the Hoover plan. In that situation the Hoover Commission had recommended 3 years ago that the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs be given more authority over selecting contractors for the veteran educational programs. With all of these things in mind the Jaycees began a Nation-wide program to tell other veterans about the need for streamlining the VA. After carrying out direct community programs in hundreds of cities and towns, we can assure this committee that veterans who get all the facts want a revitalized, reorganized Veterans' Administration to provide more efficient services.

We understand that many of the VA reorganization recon mendations can be effected without a new law. The testimony of the Citizens Committee for the Hoover report before this committee pointed out some progress the VA has made, but it also pointed out that the primary organizational changes have not been made. We believe these changes are still needed for two reasons: (1) because the Trundle task force states that the recommendations contained in the bills under consideration are sound and will apply as long as the VA's mission is unchanged; (2) while some improvements in the VA have been made, they have not straightened out the confused lines of authority shown in the charts of the Citizens Committee for the Hoover Report. The Jaycees are not management experts; but

service and business experience has taught us that it is inefficient and wasteful to have too many people reporting to one boss, or one person with too many bosses.

The Jaycees respectfully request this committee's approval of these measures to avoid further delays in reorganizing the Veterans' Administration. We feel the time has come for the Congress to do what the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs apparently will not. This agency has continued with its operations virtually unchanged 3 years after they were demonstrated to be inefficient and wasteful. As taxpayers who must pay for these services, as veterans who are beneficiaries, and as citizens who are interested in more efficient Government operations, we most sincerely hope this committee will favorably recommend the passage of H. R. 3316 and H. R. 3686, which will provide top level reorganization of the Veterans' Administration, and H. R. 3317 and H. R. 3677, which will modernize veteran insurance operations in a Veterans Insurance Corporation within the Veterans' Administration. The CHAIRMAN. I want to say in that connection that I was here when Mr. Hoover was President and if he had approved our bill to pay an adjusted compensation to World War I veterans, the panic that swept his administration out of power would never have occurred and he would have been reelected President.

All this bunk that is being spread accusing those boys of being Communists is the greatest outrage I have ever known, the leaders of those boys were the finest Americans I have ever known. There have been a few Communists over on the side but not any more than we have today.

Are there any questions?

Mr. TEAGUE. I don't believe I have a question.

Mr. AYERS. I would like to add that I wish he had been reelected. Mr. SITTLER. I would like to say that I believe that Mr. Gossett has made a very fine statement on behalf of an organization that has 85 percent veterans and that I compliment him very highly on the presentation of the junior chamber and I think they selected the right man to come in and make it.

Mr. GoSSETT. Eighty-five percent of them are World War II veterans. I presume the others are World War I.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Gossett.

Mr. GOSSETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. You are more than welcome.

That ends the hearing for this morning, I believe, doesn't it? We meet again the 3d of June, Tuesday. That is Jefferson Davis' birthday.

(Whereupon, at 11:20 a. m., the committee adjourned.)

REORGANIZATION OF VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION

TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 1952

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a. m. in room 356, the Honorable John Rankin (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. The first witness this morning is Gen. John Thomas Taylor. I might say to you that this is John Taylor's birthday and Jefferson Davis', too. Both had the honor of being born on the 3d of June.

General TAYLOR. Is that going to be in the record?

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.

General Taylor has been with the veterans ever since I have been in Congress.

General TAYLOR. We have both grown old together.

STATEMENT OF GEN. JOHN THOMAS TAYLOR, LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANT, THE AMERICAN LEGION

General TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, we, the American Legion, appreciate this opportunity of being here today to present our point of view in reply to the statements made by the representative of the so-called citizens' committee who appeared before you the other day.

You have two bills before you rather, four bills: those dealing with the establishment of an insurance corporation, H. R. 3317 and H. R. 3677; and those dealing with the so-called reorganization of what is left of the Veterans' Administration, H. R. 3316 and H. R. 3686.

Mr. DEVEREUX. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt just a minute? General, what do you mean by "what is left of the Veterans' Administration?"

General TAYLOR. I am going to go into that; exactly so.
Mr. DEVEREUX. All right.

General TAYLOR. After Milo J. Warner, the past national commander of the American Legion, the chairman of the insurance advisory board, who is so thoroughly familiar with this question of insurance, after he goes into this question of these two particular bills dealing with insurance, he will be followed by Past National Commander Paul H. Griffith who was the former Assistant Secretary of Defense, as you know. He will go into this matter of the so-called reorganization. After they have concluded, I shall sum up in reply to