cause of increases in monthly social security benefits. This measure was again introduced in the 93d Congress as H.R. 1492.

We are all familiar with Public Law 92-198, the "no-loss" pension formula, which was signed into law in December 1971 to offset the March, 1971 10 percent increase in social security benefits. This law created a new and more responsive formula for determining veterans' pensions by providing an average cost of living increase in pension of 6.5 percent and an increase of $300 in the income limitation to establish the current limits of $2,600 for a single pensioner and $3,800 for pensioners with dependents.

Yet, in spite of this action, the 20 percent increase in social security benefits affected the total aggregate income of pensioners in such a way that the fomula of Public Law 92-198 was not expensive enough to offset the increase.

This committee has before it for consideration a number of measures to deal with this situation. I do not feel that social security benefits should be counted in computing veterans' pensions. They are both incomes which the recipient has earned for two different reasons. I emphasize fully with the thousands of pensioners who feel that they have been cheated. What has been given to them by one hand of the Government has been taken away by another. These people have worked for many years and have looked to this assistance, which they have earned, in their retirement.

I urge this committee to move forward in responding to this problem. I remain hopeful that the 93d Congress will not forget them and will act to restore their pensions.

STATEMENT OF HON. J. HERBERT BURKE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Mr. BURKE. Mr. Chairman, and members of this distinguished subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to submit a statement for the record in support of my bill H.R. 1753, which would amend title 38 of the United States Code to make certain that recipients of veterans' pension and compensation will not have the amount of such pension or compensation reduced because of increases in monthly social security benefits.

The 92d Congress caused many veterans to question how much the Congress really cares about their welfare by enacting a 20 percent increase in social security benefits and failing to raise the income limitations on veterans pensions so that veterans could enjoy the full benefit of the increase. It is my hope that this committee will act favorably on H.R. 1753 so that this situation is never repeated again. It seems like a slick shyster's trick to promise an increase in benefits and then fail to permit those who need it most to receive it fully. It is a caseof the Federal Government giving something with one hand and taking it away with the other.

The present inflation in our country hits hardest at senior citizens, especially those on fixed incomes, whose purchasing power has been diminished in necessary areas like food and shelter. The income limitations presently in effect, when combined with the earnings limitations placed on social security recipients, keep many senior veterans in poverty.

It seems cruel and heartless to treat people who have served our country in the uniformed services in such an unfair and harsh manner. Many have fought to assure the freedom and prosperity that we have today, and for us to be less generous with our money than they were with their lives seems like a case of biting the hand that protected us. I am sure it is not necessary to reiterate what has happened to the price of food since the beginning of the year or for that matter to the price of rent and clothing. The veterans receiving social security and VA benefits needed the full 20 percent increase in social security last year, but this year their plight is close to desperation.

I strongly urge that this subcommittee act to halt the cutbacks in veterans pensions that have been made due to last year's increase in social security, and I further urge that it act so that this situation cannot arise again in future years.

STATEMENT OF HON. BURT L. TALCOTT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON H.R. 3864

WE MUST INCREASE OUR VETERANS' PENSIONS

Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I commend you for conducting these hearings, and I welcome the opportunity to appear to discuss with you the urgent matter of veterans, and their survivors, who receive veterans' pensions.

The need for an increase in veterans' pensions is immediate. It is true that Congress increased the pension rates about 2 years ago by Public Law 92-198. The maximum annual income limitations for pension eligibility was increased $300, and a 62 percent (6.5 percent) cost-of-living increase in the pension rate schedule was provided. A new formula approach for relating pension to income was also instituted.

However, Congress subsequently provided a 20-percent increase in social security benefits. At the time when most recipients of social security benefits were receiving more money, many veterans benefits were in effect automatically degraded by our effort to improve social security benefits.

Title 38 of the United States Code provides monthly pensions based on income and age of disability. Eligibility includes wartime veterans discharged under conditions other than dishonorable after 90 or more days service. They must be at least 65 years of age or totally and permanently disabled. Pensions are also provided for surviving widows and children of such veterans.

However, pensions for veterans of World War I and after are subject to strict income limitations, in contrast with pensions of the Spanish-American War veterans, which are awarded on the basis of service without regard to need.

As a result of the most recent increases in social security benefits, more than 1.2 million veterans have suffered a reduction in their veterans' pensions. Also, 20,000 pensioners have been dropped from the pension rolls entirely. And, in fact, 15,000 veterans and their widows have actually suffered a loss in their aggregate income. This was certainly not the intent of Public Law 92-336.

My bill would ameliorate this unfortunate situation. If enacted, H.R. 3864 would increase the pension rate for veterans by $18, from

$130 to $148 for a single veteran, from $140 to $158 for a veteran with one dependent, from $145 to $163 for a veteran with two dependents, and from $150 to $168 for a veteran with three or more dependents. It would also increase the pension rate for widows by $6, from $87 to $93; and for widows with one dependent, from $104 to $110. In addition, the income limitation would be increased by $600, from $2,600 to $3,200 for a single veteran or widow; and from $3,800 to $4,400 for a veteran with dependents, or widow with dependents. This new rate and income limitation is certainly more commensurate with our inflationary prices and with the increasing costs of living which our veterans and their widows on fixed income must face.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BRADEMAS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA, ON H.R. 100, H.R. 1492, AND RELATED BILLS

Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have this opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 100, H.R. 1492, and similar measures to make certain that recipients of veterans' pensions and compensation will not have the amount of such pension or compensation reduced because of interests in monthly social security benefits.

Mr. Chairman, last year Congress voted a 20-percent across-theboard increase in social security. The principal beneficiaries of the increase will be older Americans.

In recent years, the cost of housing, food, and other consumer goods and services has risen dramatically. The 20-percent increase was intended simply to assure that social security benefits kept pace with inflation and the rapidly rising cost of living that continues to erode fixed incomes on which many older Americans must live.

As chairman of the Select Subcommittee on Education, which has jurisdiction over Older Americans Act programs, and as sponsor of the comprehensive older Americans services bill, which recently was signed into law by the President, I am particularly concerned about the plight of many of our older citizens who are living at or near poverty level, and I was, therefore, naturally pleased by the action taken in the last Congress to increase social security benefits.

I regret, however, that the full benefit of the social security increase voted last year, and any subsequent cost-of-living increase, may not be realized by a number of older Americans who also qualify for veterans' pensions or widows' dependency and indemnity compensation. Under law, as a veteran's outside income increases, his or her pension is accordingly reduced. This has the impact of partially or completely canceling out the effect of any social security increase for veterans and their widows.

In fact, I understand that unless the law is modified, 1.2 million veterans and survivors will receive reduced veterans' pension checks and another 20,000 will be dropped from the benefit roles altogether. Mr. Chairman, Congress must act immediately to avoid any further hardship on our older Americans who now qualify, as well, for veterans' benefits. I respectfully urge you to give your favorable consideration to H.R. 100, H.R. 1492, and similar bills, to assure that the full social security increase is passed along to all beneficiaries and to

assure that persons who receive veterans' pensions continue to receive these special benefits for which they qualified prior to the implementation of the social security increase.

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES J. CARNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to present testimony in support of H.R. 1492, a bill to amend title 38 of the United States Code to make certain that recipients of veterans' pension and compensation will not have the amount of such pension or compensation reduced because of increases in monthly social security benefits. Mr. Chairman, there can be little doubt in anyone's mind that this country owes its veterans a great debt. We can never truly repay our veterans for their lost years of service and their dedication to their country. However, Congress can and does provide a pension system to assist veterans and their families. Unfortunately, the veterans' pension system as presently constituted contains some inadequacies which ought to be corrected. In the 92d Congress, we made great strides toward the goal of establishing a more equitable and responsive pension system for the Nation's veterans. However, the problem of the relationship between the veterans' pension system and the social security system still must be solved.

For this reason, I cosponsored H.R. 1492. This legislation is long overdue. How much longer can the Congress continue to work at crosspurposes? In March of 1971, we passed a 10-percent social security increase; in December of 1971, we passed a veterans' pension bill to offset the social security increase. In July of this past year, we passed a 20-percent social security increase; and once again we are faced with the prospect of reductions in veterans' pension and compensation. Indeed, some veterans and veterans' dependents have lost their pension benefits entirely.

Mr. Chairman, this is a grave injustice. There is no valid reason why the veteran should receive less of an increase in social security payments than his neighbor just because he also receives veterans' benefits. If anything, the veteran should receive more, not less. It is our responsibility to see that the veteran will be helped when we legislate increases in social security benefits. We can avoid needless delay and hardships by the enactment of H.R. 1492, a simple disregard of increases in social security benefits for the purpose of veterans' pension income.

Last session when the Senate passed an increase in veterans' pension to offset the social security increase, the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Congressman Olin E. Teague, promised that legislation similar to H.R. 1492 would receive early consideration by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. I applaud the distinguished gentleman for fulfilling his pledge. We must act swiftly if veterans' pensioners are not to be hurt by the social security increase. Therefore, I respectfully urge my colleagues on the Veterans' Affairs Committee to report this muchneeded legislation without delay. Our veterans deserve no less than our wholehearted support. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM RAILSBACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

WE MUST BE FAIR TO OUR VETERANS AND TO THEIR DEPENDENTS

Mr. RAILSBACK. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I commend you for holding these hearings on veterans' legislation and appreciate this opportunity to submit my thoughts to you about two bills of particular concern to me.

In the beginning of this Congress, I was pleased to join Congressman Hillis and nearly 60 of our colleagues in sponsoring H.R. 2687, a bill to improve the pension system for veterans and their dependents. This legislation provides a $600 increase in their maximum income limitation, so that no veteran would be forced off the pension rolls because of the recent 20-percent increase in social security benefits.

The social security increase was designed by the Congress and signed into law by the President to compensate for increases in the cost of living. I fully supported the increase because I have many senior citizens in my district who need such assistance.

Unfortunately, however, provisions in our current law prevent veterans from benefiting fully by that social security increase, for veterans benefits are based upon income limits. Thus, when social security benefits are increased, benefits for veterans are decreased. Unless the bill I am cosponsoring is enacted, everyone who draws social security will receive a substantial increase except our veterans. That a social security increase could so adversely affect the pension system now in existence is unworthy of the Americans who have contributed so greatly to our country. We cannot allow this injustice.

If we do not act immediately, over 1.3 million veterans and their widows will have a reduction in their veterans' pension because of the increase in social security benefits. Another 20,000 will be dropped from the pension rolls entirely unless remedial action is taken.

The bill I am cosponsoring will not only increase the income limitation, but will also liberalize the formula for computing veterans' pensions. The base for veterans with no dependents will be increased by $18 monthly to $148; for veterans with a dependent, by $18 monthly to $158; for widows with no children, from $87 to $93 monthly; and for widows with children, from $104 to $110 monthly. Certainly we cannot deny our veterans and their dependents this minimal monthly increase in their well-deserved pensions.

As you are aware, I have also introduced another bill which is directed exclusively to World War I veterans. Most of these individuals are now living on very limited incomes and are especially vulnerable to cost-of-living increases. Therefore, my bill, H.R. 2400, provides that certain retirement income-such as social security benefits-shall not be counted as income when veterans' benefits are computed, and that pensions of World War I veterans who have served overseas shall be increased by 10 percent.

Mr. Chairman, our veterans have served the country faithfully. We must let them know we deeply appreciate their services in the past, and