STATEMENT OF CORNELIUS H. BULL OF VIRGINIA, JUDGE ADVOCATE OF AMERICAN VETERANS' ASSOCIATION

This bill, H. R. 8948, deals with certain veterans of the Regular Military Establishment and appears to have as its purpose providing more adequate compensation for those suffering from service-connected disabilities.

So long as this legislation is confined to service-connected disabilities manifesting themselves within a reasonable time which are not to be stretched into some of the absurdities now prevailing in laws relating to World War veterans, this association advocates the principles of the bill.

One objectionable feature is to be found in section 4, line 8, on page 4 of the bill: Namely the words "will not be in order." This section apparently provides that service-connection shall be denied if there be an intercurrent injury or if the disability be due to the veterans' own misconduct. If service-connection in such cases is to be denied it should be so stated and not declared to be "not in order.” The testimony of General Hines and the questions of members of the committee tended to bring out the principles of the rate structure to be applied. As it appears that more study is to be given to the rate of pensions to be received by the beneficiaries of this bill and as more data is to be supplied the committee, we prefer to have the benefit of this additional data before commenting on the rate to be paid at this time.

At a hearing before this committee on H. R. 8690 on January 25 and 29, 1938, the following colloquy took place between Mr. Maas, a member of the committee, and Mr. Bull, who was then appearing against the bill on behalf of the American Veterans' Association:

"Mr. MAAS. Have you been before any of the committees advocating that? "Mr. BULL. No; I have not; this is the first committee before which I have ever appeared.

"Mr. MAAS. You have been organized quite a while. It seems to me that we should have heard from you before this.

"Mr. BULL. This assignment was given me to come up here and speak, and we have been heard from before.

"Mr. MAAS. You are always here when you are against, but you are not here when you are for.

"Mr. BULL. We have had a bill introduced, Senate bill 2891, by Senator George. I will be glad to furnish you a copy if you want it. The purpose of this bill is to increase the existing rates of death compensation payable to widows, children, and dependent parents of World War veterans who died as the result of injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military or naval service in the World War.'

Mr. Bull appeared before the committee on June 8, the date of this present hearing, for the sole purpose of supporting the principles of H. R. 8948, the bill now under consideration, which legislation appears to have been introduced by Mr. Maas himself.

The attention of the committee is specifically directed to the fact that this organization always advocates the passage of just legislation which will generously compensate those who were actually disabled in the service or as a direct result of that service. It will continue to take that stand just as vigorously as it will oppose the claims of those who suffered no disability but who by reason of service alone demand to be supported by their fellow citizens.

STATEMENT OF MILLARD W. RICE, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS

Re H. R. 4743, H. R. 8948, and S. 3503

During the Seventy-fourth Congress, I presented informally to members of this committee the crying need for more liberal pension provisions for disabled veterans of the Regular Establishment, calling attention to the fact that under existing laws, the amount of their pensions ranged all the way from 35 to 75 percent of the amounts of pension or of compensation paid to war veterans for similar disabilities. Several conferences were then also held with officials of the

Veterans' Administration. Following such discussions of the facts, and studies by Veterans' Administration officials and other Federal agencies, a bill was introduced by the chairman of this committee, which, after very speedily passing both Houses of Congress during the last few days of the Seventy-fourth Congress, was approved by the President on June 24, 1936, and became Public Law No. 788, in effect providing that disabled veterans of the Regular Establishment should be entitled to a protective award of the amount they were receiving on March, 19, 1933, of not more than 75 percent of the amount of compensation paid to World War veterans for similar disabilities.

Although Public Law No. 788 was deficient in many respects and did not fully meet our request for more liberal pension legislation for the disabled veterans of the Regular Establishment, nevertheless it was a big step in that direction and did increase the pension of more than 22,000 veterans of the Regular Establishment (many of whom have had war service) by an average of $5 per month, at a first year's cost of more than $2,000,000.

In spite of the enactment of Public Law No. 788, however, it still remains true that pensions are being paid to disabled veterans of the Regular Establishment in amounts ranging from only 35 to 75 percent of the amounts of pension or compensation awarded to war veterans for similar disabilities. Total disability provides for them a pension of only $45 per month, whereas a war veteran would' get $100 per month for a permanent total service-connected disability. There is also a deplorable lack of uniformity as to the amounts of pension payable, depending on when they served, when they submitted their claims, when they established their claims, etc.

The vocational handicap and the economic needs of the average disabled' veteran of the Regular Establishment is the same as for the average war veteran suffering with the same disability. Generally speaking, the service-connected disability of the average disabled veteran of the Regular Establishment is incurred after the man has spent a considerable number of years in the armed forces of the United States, so that when, by reason of such disability, he cannot reenlist in the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps, he may have arrived at middle age, when it becomes very difficult, if not impossible, for him to be retrained in any other occupation, and when by reason of his very age he may find it impossible to secure any sort of gainful employment. As a matter of actual fact, therefore, frequently the disability of a veteran of the Regular Establishment, due to his military or naval service, may really be more of an employment handicap to him, as an individual, than would a similar disability be to a war veteran discharged from his military service when he is still comparatively young and has the opportunity to make some kind of industrial adjustment.

Service in the armed forces of the United States during time of peace is essential to the maintenance of an adequate national defense for the Nation. Young men who go into one of the branches of the armed forces of the United States, patriotically to serve their country either in time of peace or in time of war, should equitably have the assurance that in the event that they incur disability by reason of such service they will be adequately pensioned to make up in part for the economic loss caused by some handicapping disability.

Adequate provisions for the welfare of former members of the Regular Establishment who are suffering with service-connected disabilities is the best assurance young men can have that they will be properly provided for, in the event that their military or naval service results in some disability.

It is therefore an investment in patriotism to see that adequate pension provisions for veterans of the Regular Establishment, who become disabled by reason of their service therein, are actually applied as to those who have previously been so affected, and are promised to those who may in the future become so disabled. Being convinced that a disability, whether incurred in so-called peacetime, or in wartime service, is equally disabling and results in about the same degree of vocational handicap, and in about the same economic need, on the average, the Veterans of Foreign Wars has, for the last several years, been on record, by the adoption of encampment resolutions, to the effect that veterans of the Regular Establishment suffering with service-connected disabilities, should receive pensions: equivalent to at least 90 percent of the amount of pensions or compensation payable to war veterans suffering with similar disabilities. In conformance with that policy, the Veterans of Foreign Wars sponsored the introduction of H. R. 4743, by the chairman of this committee, the Honorable Allard H. Gasque, so providing. At the time of the introduction of H. R. 4743, it was also publicly supported by the Regular Veterans Association and by the Army and Navy Union. After

the introduction of H. R. 4743, studies began to be made by the Veterans' Administration, the War Department, the Navy Department, and the Budget Bureau as to the justifiability for such proposed legislation, and as to just what additional liberalizing legislation ought to be enacted for the benefit of disabled veterans of the Regular Establishment.

We still are of the opinion that the provisions of H. R. 4743 are more equitable, justifiable, and feasible than the provisions of any other bill before this committee. The Administrator of Veterans' Affairs, Gen. Frank T. Hines, has agreed that his report will include a detailed analysis of all of the bills before this committee which are designed to increase benefits for disabled veterans of the Regular Establishment, and that his report will also outline the joint recommendations of the several agencies which have studied this matter.

We believe that the studies which have been undertaken should make it possible to arrive at some mutually satisfactory agreement as to the provisions of a bill to provide increased pension benefits for veterans of the Regular Establishment who have become disabled by reason of their military or naval service, and that such bill ought to be enacted into law during the first part of the Seventy-sixth Congress, inasmuch as it appears to be impossible of enactment as the result of action on the part of the Seventy-fifth Congress.

Being composed of the surviving veterans of the several foreign wars, campaigns, and expeditions in which the United States has been engaged, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States has within its membership many who, after serving during wartime, have subsequently served in one of the branches of the armed forces of the United States during time of peace.

Although this proposed legislation is designed beneficially to affect those who have become disabled by reason of their military or naval service during time of peace, it is nevertheless true that thousands of those so-called peacetime veterans who would be beneficially affected by this proposed legislation have actually also served during time of war. In many cases it may be quite probable that their wartime service may really have accounted for the inception of the disabilities, perhaps discovered during some reenlistment several years after a preceding war experience. Whether the beneficiaries may or may not have served their country in its armed forces during time of war, or only during time of peace, the obligation of the Federal Government adequately to provide for those who may have become disabled by reason of such service, is equally binding and ought to be assumed by the enactment of suitable legislation so providing.

Certainly, some additional liberalizing legislation to provide increased benefits for veterans of the Regular Establishment who have become disabled by reason of their military or naval service, more in line with the benefits receivable by war veterans for similar disabilities, is urgently needed, by the individuals affected, is mandated by a sense of justice and equity, and is highly desirable from a nationaldefense standpoint.

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULARS,
Washington, D. C., June 11, 1938.

Hon. ALLARD H. GASQUE,

Chairman, House Committee on Pensions,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN GASQUE: Our organization, the National Association of Regulars, would like to submit a statement in regards to H. R. 8948.

While we feel that there should be no discrimination whatever in the amount of pension paid for a service-connected disability, regardless of date such disability was incurred, we are not opposed to the passage of this bill because it partially equalizes the differences in pensions now paid, and therefore benefits a large group of disabled who served in the Regular Establishment.

We invite attention to the fact that in Canada, England, and most other countries, there is no differentiation in the amount of pension paid to those disabled in time of peace as compared to those disabled in time of war. We as a country, boast of our riches, and how well we treat our disabled, yet some of the sufferings related in the letters of our disabled refute these statements.

We have many old soldiers on the pension rolls who come under the antiquated general law of 1862, who draw only $6 and $8 monthly. Yet, when these feeble old men of from 80 to 90 years apply for old-age assistance from their respective States, they are rejected because of the pitiful little pension they draw from their Government; penalized because they became disabled while honorably and faithfully serving their country.

The dread thought of the poorhouse looms in the minds of many, as evidenced in letters received by us. We quote in part from one received from a former member of Company A, Eleventh United States Infantry, as follows:

"I enlisted April 10, 1891, and was discharged August 18, 1894, on surgeon's certificate of disability. I draw $30 a month pension-my claim number is C-2565288.

"I am in bad shape and will be 70 years old on next birthday. My wife is old and won't long be able to wait on me, and I dread to think of the poorhouse; it is not pleasant to think of. If I could get an increase it would be a godsend." When the old general law was amended so as to provide $30 monthly pension for total disability, that amount would keep the wolf from the door. Since then the cost of living has mounted nearly 300 percent. As the pensioner grew older his $1 per day would buy less and less. In order to meet this rising cost Members of Congress were forced to raise their own salaries 331⁄2 percent in the year 1927. We believe that it is high time that Congress recognize the distress of these old men who also served their country. We therefore urge passage of H. R. 8948 at this session. Many of our comrades will not be with us when the Seventy-sixth Congress convenes.

Respectfully submitted by,

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULARS,
EDGAR H. TABER, Adjutant General.

[H. R. 9945, 75th Cong., 3d sess.]

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 18, 1938

Mr. HENDRICKS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions and ordered to be printed

A BILL To increase and equalize the pensions of the disabled ex-service men of the Regular Establishment whose disabilities were service-incurred

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who served in the Regular Establishment of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, and who has been regularly discharged from such service otherwise than dishonorably, and who is disabled from an injury incurred or disease contracted in such service and in line of duty, or from the aggravation by active service and in line of duty of an injury or disease existing prior to such service shall be entitled to receive a pension at the following rates per month:

(1) If and while the disability is rated at 10 per centum, $10; (2) If and while the disability is rated at 20 per centum, $20; (3) If and while the disability is rated at 30 per centum, $30; (4) If and while the disability is rated at 40 per centum, $40; (5) If and while the disability is rated at 50 per centum, $50; (6) If and while the disability is rated at 60 per centum, $60; (7) If and while the disability is rated at 70 per centum, $70; (8) If and while the disability is rated at 80 per centum, $80; (9) If and while the disability is rated at 90 per centum, $90; (10) If and while the disability is rated at total, $100.

SEC. 2. The pension or increase in pension at the rates herein provided for, as to all persons whose names are now on the pension rolls, shall commence at the rates herein provided on the 1st day of the month next following the passage and approval of this Act; and the pension or rate of pension provided for all persons coming within the provisions hereof and whose applications have not been acted upon, and all persons who shall hereafter file application and secure favorable action thereon, shall begin with the date of filing of such application with the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs.

SEC. 3. The administrative and penal provisions of the laws administered by the Veterans' Administration are hereby made applicable to this Act; and except for fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation, the provisions of this Act shall not be held to reduce the pension or compensation being paid to any person at the time this Act takes effect.

SEC. 4. All Acts and parts of Acts which conflict or are inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed, modified, and amended.

DATA SUBMITTED BY BRAgadier GeneraL FRANK T. HINES, ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, PERTAINING TO THE STUDY OF BENEFITS PRovided for THE REGULAR ESTABLISHMENT

Following promulgation by the President of the original Veterans Regulations under Public No. 2, Seventy-third Congress, March 20, 1933, the Veterans' Administration conducted a study of veterans' benefits, including benefits based upon service other than during a period of war. In addition to recommendations to liberalize the provisions of the Veterans Regulations, consideration was given to representations and requests made for additional benefits. As result of these considerations, under dates of December 30 and 31, 1935, letters were dispatched to the Secretary of War, Secretary of the Navy, and the Commandant of the Coast Guard, accompanied by an analysis, tables, résumés, and drafts, all referred to in the correspondence. The data referred to are incorporated as follows:

[Copy]

N. B.-Same letter with attachments also transmitted to Secretary of the Navy and Commandant, the Coast Guard. DECEMBER 31, 1935.

SIR: The President has requested this Administration to prepare a study of the laws governing the granting of benefits to enlisted men of the Regular Establishment and has requested me to confer with him on this subject following completion of the study. The enclosed folder contains a copy of the study conducted by this Administration and memorandum and data submitted to me by the Solicitor of the Veterans' Administration. Because of the scope and importance of the subject matter, I respectfully request that the enclosed study receive thorough consideration and that a report and recommendations be made for my guidance.

The study includes legislative history affecting the particular group, together with analytical tables showing the effects of Public, No. 2, Seventy-third Congress, and the Veterans Regulations.

Contacts have been made with this Administration by various individuals affected by the regulations, with particular reference to the Regular Establishment group, requesting increases in particular rates. Draft of a bill submitted. to me by the Solicitor reflects proposals made to the Veterans' Administration designed to grant the World War rates to the Regular Establishment group and also to establish what would be known as retirement pension to be paid by the Veterans' Administration, which would be in effect a provision for disability retirement not now provided by the Army, Navy, or Marine Crops. The disabled man would be permitted to elect between the present rates granted the World War veterans and retirement for disability. Provision is made in the bill for payment of 100 percent of the World War veterans' rates where the injury was received in combat in a military or naval campaign, expedition, or occupation, whereas those rates would be reduced by 20 percent in all other service-connected

cases.

Other correspondence received by this Administration urges that the absence of provision for disability retirement for enlisted men in the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps along the line of that granted members of the Coast Guard represents an injustice and that retirement for disability should be provided. Reference is made to the table of comparison of the retirement, pension, and disability compensation laws applying to enlisted men and nurses, marked "Exhibit No. 7." It will be noted that although no provision is made for disability retirement for enlisted men in the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps similar to the system employed by the Coast Guard, that nurses are provided for in case of disability. You will also note that the provisions of the civil-service retirement laws have been included in the comparison to show the status of rights with reference to Government employees, generally, as compared to those in the military or naval service.

Under the existing laws a member of the Coast Guard disabled in line of duty, if he meets the requirements of the law, may be retired for disability, or if he is unable to meet disability retirement requirements or if the penison provisions are more liberal than retirement would be, he may file claim for pension under the provisions of the laws administered by the Veterans' Administration. This brings to mind the fact that with a dual system of pension and retirement it may be possible to graduate a disability retirement for the enlisted men of the Army,