Page images

GI bills expired only 20 percent gave that excuse. What is the difference between the total number leaving in both situations!

Mr. Jackson. This is a percentage figure.

Mr. GEORGE. I want the percentage, the total number that left voluntarily, when those two bills were in effect, and the total number that separated when they were not.

Mr. Jackson. I will ask Colonel Rush of the Air Force, if I may call on one of my assistants to give me that information.

Mr. GEORGE. That is why he brought these people with him, Mr. Teague.

Colonel Rush. We are losing, in the Air Force, about 40,000 to 50,000 first termers a year, or were at the time the figure of 45 to 50 percent was derived. So it is in the neighborhood of 20,000 to 25,000 that are getting out to pursue further education and take advantage of benefits. A drop to 20 percent would be of about the same magnitude and the same absolute figure.

Mr. GEORGE. That is the reason for leaving?
Colonel Rush. Yes, sir.

Mr. GEORGE, My question was what percentage was leaving, regardless of the reason, then as compared to now.

Colonel Rush. As for those coming up at expiration of service every year, about 45 to 50 percent are leaving.

Mr. GEORGE. What was the percentage when the GI bills were in effect? About the same?

Colonel Rush. Yes. That is true. But the change has been that they are saying, in our surveys, that they are getting out for different

Mr. GEORGE. The reasons are different, but the percentage is about the same. Is that correct?

Colonel Rush. That is essentially correct.

Mr. GEORGE. Now I would like to ask the Secretary one more question: What percentage of these people you say you have been educating, that are in service, complete any program of education?

Mr. Jackson. I am not sure that I understand what you mean by a program of education. They complete the required service school terms, which our charts show run from 9 to 21 weeks.

Mr. GEORGE. Does that qualify them to go out and become engineers or scientists, or merchanics, or anything of the sort!

Mr. Jackson. No, it qualifies them to do the job which they have, which may be that of a technician with respect to aircraft or maintenance and so on, and with that experience it would better qualify them to handle a job of that kind when they got outside.

Mr. GEORGE. Another question, Mr: Secretary: Did you present this same argument before the Senate committee? Or was a similar argument submitted ?

Mr. Jackson. May I ask the gentleman at my left? I think he was the witness there.

Colonel Rusu. Yes, essentially the same. The statement today is longer and has been amplified with concrete data from the Department of Defense records.


Mr. Flynn. Under the draft law, those students attending colleges—must they at the present time maintain any standard or be in the upper half of their class?

Mr. Jackson. Yes. As the chairman has indicated, they are required to maintain a standing equivalent to the upper half of their class; yes, sir.

Mr. FLYNN. So that boys and girls of college age who did not happen to be in the upper half of their class, would have to be drafted out of school and into service, would they not?

Mr. Jackson. The young men would be liable for the draft. As to whether or not they would actually be drafted-or put it this way: Their deferment for attending college would be removed. But it would not be automatic; as I understand it, they would be liable for the draft.

Mr. FLYNN. Whether they would be reached in the 100,000 a year you are now taking would be questionable?

Mr. JACKSON. That is probably a proper way to state it. Mr. Wool is more familiar with this area.

Mr. Wool. Yes, the fact is that the minimum age for involuntary induction under Selective Service currently is 22 years or higher. In other words, very few if any young men who are continuing from high school through college would be reached normally for the draft until they had an opportunity to graduate.

Mr. Flynn. If they were not in the upper half they could be drafted, however?

Mr. Wool. If they were age 23, for example, and were not in the proper percentage—in some cases it is the upper half of their classthey might then be draft vulnerable.

Mr. Flynn. Now, referring, Mr. Secretary, to your chart, table III, you have the more skilled trained military personnel in the top three categories. And in the bottom three categories, administrative and clerical, crafts, and ground combat. It is a fact, is it not, that you did not consider those as skilled as the top three crafts?

Mr. Jackson. I think that is correct-meaning "skilled”—the particular degree of specialization in the skill.

Mr. Flynn. And therefore they are not quite as valuable to the services as the more skilled ?

Mr. JACKSON. I would hesitate very much to sit here and say that our ground combat people are not equally valuable as any other people in the services.

Mr. Flynn. These bottom three categories constitute about 50 percent of the personnel of the services?

Mr. JACKSON. Roughly, yes, sir.

Mr. Flynn. And according to your chart, on table II, these 50 percent of the services receive from 9 to 15 weeks of schooling in service.

Mr. JACKSON. Right. Yes, sir. Administrative and clerical, crafts, and services total 40 percent. Ground combat, not shown in table II, accounts for an additional 12 percent of the enlisted strength, making a total of 52 percent.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. FLYNN. And that is in the special skills?
Mr. Jackson. Yes, sir.

Mr. Flynn. And in those skills, there are only from 40 to 47 percent actually receiving that schooling; is that right?

Mr. JACKSON. That is correct.

Mr. Flynn. So that would leave about 25 percent of the boys coming into the service that get no training at all while they are in military service?

Mr. Jackson. That is correct as far as formal school training is concerned. That is what this chart refers to, sir. But that is not to say that any that come into the service receive no training.

Mr. Flynn. Yes. We all admit that the service itself is a good training. But there would be 25 percent that would receive no formal training while in service.

Mr. Jackson. School service training; that is correct.

Colonel Rush. Formal technical training. However, they will receive on-the-job training, which is a formal course out on the job. But this is where they actually go into a classroom situation in a technical school.

Mr. Flynn. Yes; I understand. So there would be 25 percent that would receive no formal training other than on the job, and another 25 percent that would receive only from 9 to 15 weeks.

Colonel Rush. Yes. You realize many men come in that we give a directed duty assignment to in the Air Force; 25 to 30 percent of the men coming in get that, for many of them have a skill that is translatable directly. For example a heavy equipment operator that has been trained outside.

Mr. Flynn. Now, it is possible, is it not, that many of the 50 percent could be young men who had indicated a desire to go to college and were possibly drafted out of college or at least had their education interrupted, who might have a very strong desire to attend the university after separating from service; is that not right?

Mr. Jackson. I do not know. I would dare say there could be some in that group who would want to go to college or gain similar education.

Mr. Flynn. It is a fact, is it not, that the formal training they receive while in the service is more of a technical nature, to fit them for a craft or a trade, rather than formal training that one would receive in the arts division of any college or university?

Mr. JACKSON. That is correct. More of it is of the former, as you indicated.

Mr. Flynn. Now, do the armed services have any objection to those boys and girls that have put in their service and performed their duty to the country receiving some assistance after their education has been interrupted, in getting the type of formal or arts type of education that they desire?

Mr. JACKSON. I do not want to quibble. I am not sure as to what “assistance.” The type of educational assistance proposed in section 2 of the bill we are opposed to. All of the people who leave the service have some benefits that accrue to them as a result of their service.

Mr. FLYNN. What I am trying to get is: Would it not be a rather selfish attitude on the part of the services to deny these boys and girls assistance after they leave the service to get their higher education, merely because they wanted to keep them in service on the job they are in, and because they do not want to put other boys and girls through from 9 to 28 weeks of training when they receive them! Would that not be rather a selfish attitude on the part of the services, to not train new boys and thereby deny some educational benefits to those who have already served ?

Mr. Jackson. I am afraid I am a little confused as to what you are addressing yourself to. I thought you were talking about these young men who get the minimum amount, as we say, of service. And your question is

Mr. Flynn. I will make it more simple. As I understand your objection to this bill, S. 1138, it is because you feel that it would draw trained personnel from the services who would leave because of the educational benefits they might get on the outside.

Mr. JACKSON. Right.

Mr. Flyxn. Thereby making it necessary for the armed services to train more personnel.

Mr. JACKSON. Correct.

Mr. Flynn. I am pointing out that at least in the last three categories, which includes 50 percent of the service, you do not train 25 percent at all; that the other 25 percent are trained only to 15 weeks. I ask you the question: If, in appearing in opposition to this bill, the armed services are somewhat selfish in attempting to deny these educational benefits to these boys and girls merely to make it unnecessary for the armed services to train boys from 9 to 15 weeks.

Mr. JACKSON. Well, I think, sir, that it would be quite different or anomalous if we were to provide these benefits to this group and then to deny it to those in the critical skills. I do not think that would be very practical.

Mr. Flynn. The same thing would apply to those in the critical skills, except in those cases, I note from your table that they have received as much as 28 weeks of training.

Mr. JACKSON. Some of them; yes.

Mr. Flynn. And that, of course, is in the particular school; not in the arts or other education?

Mr. Jackson. That is generally correct; yes sir.

Mr. FLYNN. And I would feel the same thing would apply to them if they wanted to go on. And might not your opposition to their getting an arts school education be somewhat selfish, merely because you did not want to train some of these boys as much as 28 weeks to replace them?

Mr. Jackson. Well, I think the motive certainly is not any selfish motive directed toward these individuals. I think the motive is to attempt to maintain a minimum standard of efficiency for the security of the country, and I do not believe necessarily, because these skilled people are kept in, that it follows that they would have been deprived or would have gone to college. But we do feel that unless we have


the minimum requirement of skilled people to maintain the posture which is felt necessary for the national security, we are increasing the hazards of war or perhaps inviting an attack.

Mr. FLYNN. Let me go a step further in that regard. You are only drafting 100,000 boys a year?

Mr. JACKSON. Approximately; yes.

Mr. FLYNN. And there is no question but that there is a much larger pool that could be tapped; is there not?

Mr. Jackson. There is a larger pool increasing; yes, sir.

Mr. Flynn. So there is manpower available in this age group to train and replace those that would be leaving service; is there not?

Mr. Jackson. Oh, we could get replacements if he wanted to increase the draft, the call.

Mr. Flynn. And you could get replacements capable of being trained, could you not?

Mr. Jackson. It is hard to say. The draft is a 2-year period, and if we trained a man for 28 weeks, we would get a very short net use out of him, if he went out in 2 years.

Mr. Flynn. But you would get a man capable of absorbing the training that you gave him, would you not?

Mr. JACKSON. We would get some.

Mr. Flynn. Now, could you repeat that figure for me, please, as to the number of boys in 1958 that left the services, or during the Korean war, I believe, to take advantage of these educational facilities?

Colonel Rush. About 45 to 50 percent of those who departed stated they were leaving to take advantage of educational opportunities.

Mr. Flynn. So, if that figure were to be correct, we could then anticipate if it ran true to form that 45 to 50 percent of these boys who had received only from 9 to 28 weeks of technical training would actually have a desire to leave service in order that they might get a formal education in one of the universities of the country?

Mr. JACKSON. I do not believe the colonel indicated that those boys had only 9 weeks' training.

These are boys that have served 4 years, I believe, Colonel. Colonel Rush. Yes; with similar experiences in the other services. Mr. Flynn. But 45 percent indicated they were leaving to take advantage of educational opportunities?

Colonel Rush. Yes.

Mr. FLYNN. If that ran true to form, we could anticipate that of these 145,000 coming out, 45 percent of those would leave for the same reason?

Colonel Rush. Yes to that question; but a qualified yes to your previous question, that came from that; because if you are saying that the bottom part of this chart, here, the low aptitude and intelligence people, are in this group—these people do not leave to enter the universities. Many of them, of course, will leave to go to an occupational or trade or business school, or something like that. But these are not the types who can qualify for advanced education. It

« PreviousContinue »