Page images

(The following was later received for the record:)

Numbers of persons aged 65 and over receiving old-age, survivors, and disability

insurance, old-age assistance, and both types of payments, specified dates ?

[blocks in formation]

District of Columbia.
New Hampshire..
New Jersey
New Mexico.
New York,
North Carolina
North Dakota.
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island.
South Carolina..
South Dakota.
West Virginia.

· 131,389

3,067 48, 958 101, 640 808, 217 84, 480 165, 242 22, 833 33, 607 326, 567 137, 287 17, 973 37, 341 607,547 298, 786 198, 054 140, 621 168, 897 101, 642

98, 679

1, 448 13, 904 55, 267 256, 614 47, 315 14, 492 1, 334 3, 124 69, 481 97, 289 1, 463 7, 344 75, 039 27, 418 34, 541 28, 797 56, 399 124, 818 11, 829

21, 255

527 4, 195

8, 645 122, 873 18, 530 6, 389


72, 797
| 130, 265

374, 906
436, 222
211, 910

93, 238
288, 149
40, 579
97, 973
10, 142
46, 286
378, 913

24, 501 1, 102, 293 182, 186

34, 792 566, 943 119, 347 125, 032 739, 871 50, 089 63, 594 78, 739 42, 905 163, 439 364, 726 36, 446 28, 144 165, 425 179, 076 108, 449 267, 938 15, 287

9, 456 80, 125 62, 322 46, 567 80, 135 117, 155

6,982 15, 093 2, 639 4,916 18, 821 10, 847 83, 325 49, 016

7,217 87, 556 90, 244 17, 191 50, 113 39, 611

6, 788 32, 848

9,021 55, 231 222, 061

7, 985 5, 678 14, 835 49, 856 19,832 34, 810 3, 326

862 22, 534 16, 011

314 2, 310 19, 765 6, 974 9, 333 6, 960 10, 643 35, 970 4,533 2, 198 39,060 20, 708 12, 948 19, 908 34, 427 2, 226 3, 469 1, 385 1, 790 6, 447 1,936 28, 416 7, 562 1,535 26, 392 21,684

6,070 13, 579

34 2, 865 2, 161 2,042 6, 125 52, 394 2, 029 1,981 1, 416 19, 954

1, 933 10, 763 1, 210

1 Does not include Guam and the Virgin Islands; complete data not available. 2 Number of persons receiving old-age, wife's, hushand's, widow's, widower's, and parent's benefits adjusted to exclude (1) women beneficiaries aged 62-64, (2) wife beneficiaries under age 62 with child heneficiaries in their care, and (3) duplicate counts for beneficiaries receiving both old-age and wife's or husband's beneats.

3 For some States data are for month early in 1960 other than February.

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Social Security Administration, Bureau of Public Assistance, Division of Program Statistics and Analysis, July 1, 1960.


Senator CARLSON. Isn't that a fair assumption that that situation would prevail?

Secretary FLEMMING. That is right.

Senator CARLSON. Then under any program that was covered through a social security program would we not have more individuals in some of what I call the rural States that would not be eligible for benefits, than under the proposal that you have submitted ?

Secretary FLEMMING. I will ask Commissioner Mitchell to respond to that specific question because he is very familiar with it.

Mr. MITCHELL. The situation to which you refer, Senator, I think has been to a large extent overcome by extensions of coverage during recent years to farmworkers. Now there are large numbers of farmers, both farm operators and farmworkers, who are covered and who are in a benefit status. It is true, however, that there are a substantial number of people who are receiving old-age and survivors insurance benefits who also receive public assistance because the OASI benefit may be only a minimum, not sufficient to maintain the person and his family.

Senator CURTIS. Senator Carlson, if you will yield for just a brief question on that point, now I think it would discriminate against rural areas. The number of people who were old and not in the employment market or possibilities before OASI was extended to their group will be greater than those segments of our population which OASI was available to from the beginning, sir, isn't that correct?

Secretary FLEMMING. That certainly is true.

Senator CURTIS. So a rural area that is made up of farmers, employees of farmers, and small unincorporated family run businesses would have a higher percentage of people left out of a program geared to OASI and the recipients thereof than other areas, isn't that correct? Secretary FLEMMING. I think that is a fair evaluation.

Senator CURTIS. Thank you.
Senator Carlson. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Flemming, one other point here.

Table 2 only shows money to be raised by the States totaling $627 million.

Now both of these bills—the House bill, plus your proposal as I understand it, would compel the States to raise nearly a billion. Where is the balance

Secretary FLEMMING. As indicated here the amount to be raised by the State and local governments is $627 million. Now under title 6 of the House bill, as you indicated earlier, the State's share would be about $165 million, so that gives you a total of $792 million to be raised by the States.

I do not have a breakdown by States of the $165 million

The CHAIRMAN. I just want to point out that table 2 is misleading. It does not include the total amount. It says $627 million. I asked

you for the amount of money the States would have to put up under the combination you propose and it runs to nearly a billion dollars.

Secretary FLEMMING. No, $792 million together.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, let's go over it again because I don't understand it and I want to get this right.

You confirm the fact that the House bill will require the States to raise the $64 million.

Secretary FLEMMING. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. You further confirm the fact that your administration proposal would require about $800 million?

Secretary FLEMMING. No; $627 million.

The CHAIRMAN. Well you have got an additional cost for old-age assistance and that is $75 million?

Secretary FLEMMING. Just one minute. I am sure we can come to an understanding. We are awfully close here. I have got $792 mil

. lion, you see, as I thought a few minutes ago I see you mentioned the additional assistance costs under our plan. Actually so far as the State is concerned it would not step up. It would be the Federal Government.

The CHAIRMAN. The House bill is $164 million, and your proposal is $675 million. That includes the additional costs for old-age assistance, medical care for $250 deduction of $75 million.

Secretary FLEMMING. The only difficulty there, Mr. Chairman, is you have included that additional $55 million as a State cost.

That would be a Federal cost, because actually the State public assistance would be reduced by about $10 million. So that does bring us to a total additional State cost, if you want to round it out, of just about $800 million.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, now the point I am making is, that table 2 does not show that. There it only shows $627 million.

Secretary FLEMMING. Yes, table 2, Mr. Chairman, deals only with the additional program on which I testified. It does not give a State by State breakdown of the title 6 of the House bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you got a table that does show that? Secretary FLEMMING. It is—do you have the House report in front of you?

The report of the Ways and Means Committee?

The CHAIRMAN. I think you ought to have a table to show the total cost. Secretary FLEMMING. Yes; I agree with you that it would be a good

I thing to telescope these two tables and we would be very glad to do that and furnish it for the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you submit it for the record, because you are recommending both the House bill and the administration bill; are you not?

Secretary FLEMMING. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. There ought to be a table that shows the total costs for the States.

(The following was later received for the record :)

[ocr errors]


Estimated annual Federal and State-local costs under (a) proposed medicare

program for the aged, (b) program of medical services for the aged (title XVI of Social Security Act, as added by title VI of H.R. 12580 and (c) improvement in medical services under the old-age assistance program arising from combined effect of proposed medicare program, proposed title XVI of Social Security Act, and proposed increase in Federal matching for medical services under old-age assistance in H.R. 12580

(All figures in millions)

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]



.5 4.5

6.2 113. 2

6.6 14.8 1.7 2.8 19.6

13.2 (1)

1.0 2.6 43.0 18.6 10.2

4.8 10.1 18.5 3.4 7.9 17.3 35.8 2.9 8.7 22.2 2.9 3.1 1.1 1.9 27.2

1.9 78.9 7. 3

.1 42.2 10.0

7.4 36.8 5.9 4.9 3.8 2.3 8.8 38.9 2.4

1.5 (1)

6.1 12.4

4.1 10.6


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

1 Less than $50,000. NOTE.-The above figures relate to what the experience might be in the 1st full year of operation if all States developed plans and put them in full effect. Because of the many variations possible in State plans and participation under title VI of H.R. 12580 and in the participation of individuals in the medicare plans, the above figures should not be considered to be as precise as they appear to be.


Secretary FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, the kind of a table that you are asking for will bring this out, but could I ask Mr. Myers to comment on the overlap that there would be between title 6 of the House bill and our program for the aged?

Mr. MYERS. Mr. Chairman, on this point, if both programs, that is title VI in the House bill and this medicare for the aged plan were introduced, the cost estimates that have been given are not fully additive since each one must be considered separately. However, if they were both introduced simultaneously, you would, of course, have the individual getting benefits under one program or the other so that it would not be correct to add the two together to get the total costs of the combined program. In other words, many individuals who would be aided under the House bill, would instead come under the medicare program which is more of a paid up, what you might say, insurance-type approach than the assistance-type approach in the title VI of the House bill. We would be very glad to prepare for you this combined table the result of which would be somewhat lower than the sum of the two separate tables.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, but this committee should have the information as to how much the States are required to put up in new money.

Secretary FLEMMING. That's right.

The CHAIRMAN. And the table you have submitted here is about, how short is it a couple of hundred million, is it not, 200 million short?

Secretary FLEMMING. Well, you see, as the heading on the table indicates

The CHAIRMAN. I don't care what the heading indicates.
Secretary FLEMMING. It is just the medicare program.

The CHAIRMAN. You gave the impression to the committee, or rather to me, that the total costs would be $627 million divided by the States. You read out Virginia, for instance, that is not the total.

Secretary FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, when I presented this I thought I made it clear that I was presenting a table on the medicare program and that is what it clearly says. In addition to that there is, of course, whatever expense is involved in title 6 of the House bill, but as Mr. Myers indicated there is quite an overlap between the two, and we will be glad to prepare a table which telescopes the two and give you the overall figure.

The CHAIRMAN. I think your testimony, sir, is very confusing. You stated that you favored the House bill and you favor this bill as a supplement to the House bill, and now you say they overlap and you don't show us where they overlap.

So I think you had better come to the committee meeting at another time prepared to answer the questions we know have to be answered.

Secretary FLEMMING. Well, Mr. Chairman, all I am stating is a fact that they do overlap.

The CHAIRMAN. But you say you endorse both of them you said you endorsed the House bill; didn't you?

Secretary FLEMMING. Yes; I certainly did.

The CHAIRMAN. And you said your own bill should be added, and now you say they overlap.

Secretary FLEMMING. Yes.



« PreviousContinue »