Page images
PDF
EPUB

General HERSHEY. That would not prevent them from becoming 1-A. It will not prevent them from being ordered for preinduction examination.

Senator MAGNUSON. As a matter of fact if they want to fight so bad maybe the Army is a good place for them.

General HERSHEY. They may very well be rejected when we send them up and I don't want to pick on somebody else.

Senator MAGNUSON. I understand.

General HERSHEY. But just the same we have a very strong feeling, and while we do not believe necessarily it is a lot of people, we do get rumors always of people who have perhaps deliberately done something that they can say “Yes; I have been arrested two or three times."

Senator Magnuson. But that is not per se any reason either as far as you know or you, Mr. Fuchs, for rejection.

Mr. Fuchs. This again is operations.
Senator MAGNUSON. I understand.

NATURE OF RECORD DETERMINING FACTOR

Mr. Fuchs. But I happen to know that it is the nature of the record, not the mere fact that there is a record.

General HERSHEY. We do generally though—in some armies it is a little different, sometimes the commanding officer of the induction station has the power to waive. Sometimes it has to go to the Army and sometimes to the Department of Defense and, of course, the farther things have to go the less the people know about it when it gets there.

CONCERN FOR PRINCIPLE OF SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM

Senator ALLOTT. On this whole induction thing, I have stated my position before in this committee, and having two sons in this general age, one of them has served over a 3-year hitch with the Navy and one of them still has it to do as soon as he gets out of school, I am extremely concerned about the whole principle of the Selective Service System, misnamed as I read a while ago the Universal Military Training Act, and I object to the word “Universal.” Last year in response to this you said, “Well, we will administer the laws the Congress gives us."

But it is actually getting to the state among young men where a fellow who does serve, he is either inducted or takes his 2 years, or if at the time of his induction enlists in the Navy or the Air Force and takes 3 or 4 years, or the Marine Corps, that he is looked upon as a square and sort of a dope for doing military service.

Now I am not, believe me, exaggerating this, and I can take you out to college students, which is where you get most of these people, and demonstrate this.

ATTITUDE OF YOUNG MEN TOWARD OBLIGATIONS Well, you say these are just kids, but this affects the fundamental attitude of mind of a young man toward his country and his obligations to his country and the obligations to the rest of us. I am concerned about it.

General HERSHEY. I am too, and I am concerned that you not only get it when they get in the service, but I can take you quite close here where a boy is a square if he is in the cadet corps in the city of Washington.

I had a grandson who just finished high school last year and he took the military training, but the people have that attitude — I couldn't be more concerned. Not only that, the same irresponsibility extends into all sorts of fields.

A fellow is a square if he doesn't steal cars, in some areas. It is frightening:

Senator Allott. I feel, without any disrespect to the late President, that his decree that a man could be eliminated from the draft by reason of marriage alone opened the door to even further exaggerating this feeling we are talking about. I don't agree with that decision. I hope that we can have a commission look into this because I just don't think that a boy should be able to go down and buy a marriage license and avoid his obligation to his country.

General HERSHEY. The Senator is going to make a speech Saturday night before a unit with which I spend quite a little time. We are still trying to keep obligation, citizenship, and character building to the forefront of some youngsters in this country. That is one of the reasons why I spend more time perhaps than I should with the Boy Scouts.

ROTC TRAINEES

Senator MAGNUSON. What is the status now of the young man who some kids in college call squares if they join the ROTC for training? When I was in college that was very popular. As a matter of fact you had to line up to get in. When they come up for draft, would they be naturally qualified or not necessarily?

General HERSHEY. No.

Senator MAGNUSON. There wouldn't be many of them anyway, would there?

General HERSHEY. If they are successful in the ROTC they will become officers. If they are not, then of course we have the problem. But the fact that they pass all the tests to be ROTC, they start right at the beginning on this other test. Their chances should be better, but still we have a lot of people that have been in college that fail this test. That is just a fact.

Senator MAGNUSON. You mentioned the Boy Scouts.
General HERSHEY. Yes.

Senator MAGNUSON. Would you say just generally, I know you don't have these figures, but generally a kid who has been active in Scout work would be pretty apt to pass most of these tests physically and mentally?

General HERSHEY. I don't know about passing the tests. I do have Admiral Burke at the present time who is heading a $3 million drive here and the reason he is in it is because he was impressed all during his Navy career with the fact that the boys who had been Scouts somehow or other were good sailors.

Senator MAGNUSON. Or cadets from high schools.
General HERSHEY. Yes.
(Discussion off record.)

31-706-64—pt. 1-41

reFERRAL PROCESS

Senator ALLOTT. I want to ask one question before we close on the

record. I want to be sure that you do supply me with the percentage of

workload that the poverty activities are now consuming. General HERSHEY. We will get the last 2 months involved because

there was none before that.
(The information referred to follows:)

CoST OF REFERRAL FOR 2 MONTHS

The referral process is quite simple and the requirements closely parallel the normal handling of rejectees. When the local board clerk is preparing to mail the “Notice of Acceptability” statement to registrants, she adds to the mailing sent to those rejected who failed to pass the mental examination, a letter prepared by the Department of Labor. On this she fills in the name and address of the rejected man and in some cases the address of the office to which referred, making one copy for the registrant's file. She also puts the man's name on a list to be sent to a referral point.

Normally the several papers from the examining station will be received in the local board about once or twice a month. It is estimated that it takes between 3 and 5 minutes to accomplish this, per referral.

During the 2 months this has been operating, there have been 154,000 rejectees, of which 77,000 were for mental test failure. At the maximum estimate of 5 minutes, the cost would be $10,361 or less than three-tenths of 1 percent of the payroll for local board clerks for the 2 months.

COMMITTEE RECESS

Senator MAGNUson. All right.

Now it is understood after the House passes the bill, which they hope to do by the middle of this month, or at least by the end, that we will come on back here and we may want to discuss some specific items, and hoping we can get this bill done this time before the 1st of July and .*. around here until the middle of December like we were last year.

We will place in the record at this point a statement issued by the Department of the Army pertaining to the rejection of Cassius Clay by the Army, discussed generally in an earlier portion of the hearInor. (The information follows:)

FACT SHEET PERTAINING TO CASSIU's CLAY's REJECTION BY THE ARMY

In view of the recent publicity and anticipated public reaction to the rejection of Cassius Clay for induction into the Army, the following is the sequence of events and the careful consideration given prior to reaching a decision not to accept him for induction.

Mental standards are used by all services to insure that individuals, enlisted or inducted, are trainable and can perform satisfactorily on the job. The minimum mental standards for the Army fall into two categories, those for enlistment and those for induction, and are based on tests which have proven to be effective predictors of performance in training and on the job. These tests are similar in nature to those administered for personnel placement purposes in industry and commerce, and are the best available indicators of the individual's probable mental and physical capacities and, consequently, his capacity to meet the demands of a modern military organization. Followup of individuals during many years has shown the test scores to be valid indicators of later performance.

Public Law 51, 82d Congress, first established the minimum mental standards for induction at an AFOT score of 10. This was later revised by Pub

lic Law 564, 84th Congress, to provide that during peacetime, standards may be modified by the President to permit the induction of higher quality personnel in order to promote efficiency, reduce costs, and in recognition of the fact that a peacetime Army forms the foundation for a mobilization Army and thus must be of high quality. Authority was later delegated to the Secretary of Defense. In May of 1963, the peacetime induction standards were raised because the quality of inductees was decreasing at an alarming rate to the extent that during fiscal year 1963, 42.9 percent of the entire draft were in the lowest acceptable mental category (category IV). On the other hand, the need for quality personnel was increasing because of the complexity of equipment being introduced into the Army and that planned for the future. In addition, much evidence is available that shows that these low mental category personnel are the greatest disciplinary risks. In 1963, the percentage of low mental category military personnel among prisoners in disciplinary barracks and Federal institutions was 34.2 percent, as compared to only 15.9 percent among all Army enlisted men. This approximately 2:1 ratio of low mental category prisoners to low mental category soldiers is similar to the ratio experienced over the last several years. Cassius Clay was ordered by his selective service local board in Louisville, Ky., to report to the Armed Forces Examining and Induction Station, Coral Gables, Fla., on January 24, 1964, for his preinduction examination. Clay reported as ordered and met all the requirements for induction except the mental standards. In accordance with routine procedures, Clay was given additional testing and psychological evaluations to determine if he was a true or deliberate failure. This evaluation included comparison of his responses to the patterns of true failures and of malingerers, and evaluation of his supplementary test scores in the light of his school and work history. Men who purposely fail the test and who are adjudged as capable of passing it are administratively accepted if otherwise qualified. However, it was determined by the personnel psychologist that Clay was a true test failure and gave no evidence of malingering. After a careful review of Clay's records, to elminiate any element of doubt as to his true mental ability and the possibility that anxiety about the forthcoming title fight might have influenced his test scores, the Secretary of the Army decided to have him reexamined. With the cooperation of General Hershey, Clay was ordered to report for reexamination in Louisville, Ky. The Department of the Army sent a representative to Louisville, Ky., to observe and report to the Secretary of the Army on the adequacy of the testing and their results. This representative was the senior psychologist responsible for conducting the Army's research program on ways to screen and classify enlisted personnel. He has held such a position for over 10 years, and had prior research experience in this field for the Army, as well as previous work with civil service examinations. He is a qualified psychologist, a diplomat in industrial psychology of the American Board of Examiners in Professional Psychology (ABEPP). Clay reported to the induction station as ordered on March 13, 1964. He was administered the tests and again failed to achieve qualifying scores. Accordingly, the induction station personnel psychologist evaluated Clay's pattern of responses to the test questions and carefully interviewed him to elicit appropriate background information. The original finding of being a true test failure with no evidence of malingering was confirmed by the personnel psychologist. The Department of the Army representative closely observed Clay's testing and interview. He found the processing was properly and carefully performed. He agreed with the personnel psychologist's finding. In addition, the pattern of gains and losses from first test scores as compared to retest scores, review of the pattern of answers, and careful interviewing all supported a conclusion of true failure rather than malingering. Clay's records were again reviewed and it was concluded that Clay should be rejected for induction—as are all other true test failures—based on his failure on the aptitude test plus the evaluated opinions of three psychologists that he was a true failure. Consequently, Clay's records were mailed to the Kentucky State Director of Selective Service for forwarding to Clay's local board with instructions that Clay be given a written notification, in the normal manner, of his rejection for induction.

The requirements of today's Army do not allow for acceptance of those personnel not offering a reasonable value to the defense effort. As was stated in the congressional hearings on August 16, 1957, “* * * new weapons systems have greatly increased the requirements for fully trained, and fully trainable manpower, both in a wide range of technical jobs and in our combat units.” The induction standards must be such that the new members of the Army are capable of learning new skills and applying them. The men inducted by the Army must be those who clearly show that by aptitude and intelligence, they can contribute to the national defense by filling an Army need.

COMMITTEE Recess

Senator MAGNUsoN. For the record, the committee will recess until tomorrow when we hear the Veterans' Administration.

(Whereupon, at 10 a.m., Thursday, May 7, 1964, the committee recessed, to reconvene at 8:30 a.m., Friday, May 8, 1964.)

« PreviousContinue »