an artificial limb does. Wheelchairs also cause a good deal of wear on clothing and the use of one should entitle the eligible veterans to gain the benefit of the clothing allowance provided for in this bill. To avoid administrative confusion we ask that a sentence be added to provide that eligible veterans who are in regular use of a wheelchair because of their disability, be given the clothing allowance provided for in section 362.

Mr. Chairman, specific data which covers the suggestions made in my testimony is attached and I ask that it be made part of the record along with my statement.

Senator TALMADGE. Without objection it is so ordered.

Mr. BURNS. We thank you for asking to hear PVA's views on this bill. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have at this time or submit further information, if desired.

Thank you for your consideration.

Senator TALMADGE. Thank you very much for your very fine statement, Mr. Burns. Any questions, Senator Hansen?

Senator HANSEN. No questions.

Senator TALMADGE. Thank you very much. We were very happy to have you with us.

Incidentally, I presume you know that yesterday the committee by unanimous vote, reported out of committee a bill increasing the maximum grant for specially adapted housing from $12,500 to $20,000. Mr. BURNS. Thank you, sir.

(The previously mentioned suggestive data follows:

SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO S. 3338 SUGGESTED BY

PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA

1. In Section 3 of the bill, which will provide for a new Section 362, Chapter 11, Title 38, United States Code, a sentence be added to read:

"Veterans otherwise eligible, who use a wheelchair on a regular basis due to their disability, will be considered eligible for such clothing allowance."

2. (15) By striking out "$784." in Subsections (O) and (P) and inserting : "in lieu thereof $941."

3. That all compensation rates be computed on the basis of Section 314 of Title 38, United States Code, with no distinction as to when the veteran's period of service occurred.

Senator TALMADGE. The next witness is Mr. David L. Schnair, National Service Officer, Blinded Veterans Association, accompanied by Mr. Robert Carter, Executive Director.

STATEMENT OF DAVID L. SCHNAIR, NATIONAL SERVICE OFFICER, BLINDED VETERANS ASSOCIATION, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT CARTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Mr. SCHNAIR. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I will have our national executive director, Robert Carter, read our statement, and I will follow after that.

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to present the views of the Blinded Veterans Association on S. 1564, a bill designed to increase the statutory award rate for anatomical loss or loss of use under subsection (1) of section 314 of title 38, United States Code, and on S. 3338 and S. 3344, bills designed to increase the rates of compensation for disabled veterans and their dependents.

The Blinded Veterans Association was founded in March 1945 as a membership organization of veterans who lost their sight as a result of their service in the Armed Forces of the United States. It was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York in 1947 and was chartered by act of Congress in 1958. Its members include blinded veterans of World War I, World War II, the Korean Conflict, the Vietnam era and peacetime service.

Fortunately, the number of living veterans with service-connected blindness is relatively small-approximately 5,000. However, the problems of the individual blinded veteran and his family in adjusting to blindness can be great. Therefore, the Blinded Veterans Association has concentrated since its inception in assuring the maintenance of high quality rehabilitative services by the Veterans' Administration and in motivating and assisting the blinded veteran to take advantage of these services. Our goal, in effect, is to assist each other to lead as normal a life as possible as productive citizens in our home communities. Needless to say, this goal would be virtually impossible to attain without the aid of the excellent benefit structure provided by the Congress and administered by the Veterans' Administration.

The loss of sight is many losses. It is expensive and it is a financial handicap the handicap most felt by most of us. For these reasons, from time to time certain specific needs requiring additional legislative authority become apparent. We believe that S. 1564 meets one of these specific needs and we wholeheartedly support the provisions of this bill to increase the statutory rate for anatomical loss or loss of use under subsection (k) of section 314, of title 38, United States Code.

In many instances many of us, both old and newly blinded alike, and for many reasons, remain the victims of our handicaps and must live and provide for our families on the fixed income of our disability compensation. Because of our disabilities and conditions stemming from them, many of us are unemployed or underemployed. Often, our disabilities prevent our wives from obtaining employment to augment the family income, the method used by more and more families to meet the rising cost of living. These costs have increased steadily over the years. For those of us who must make it on the fixed income of our disability compensation, the disparity between our compensation and rising costs begins after enactment of a compensation increase and widens steadily until it is reduced by a subsequent increase. Except for a brief period, we are always behind. There is every reason to believe it will also be true following enactment of the compensation increases provided in S. 3338—not to mention S. 3344. Although the proposed increases for either disabled veterans or their dependents are not what we feel they should be because they barely meet the increased cost of living, we support S. 3338 to the extent that it is the more liberal of the two bills. At the same time we request Congress to consider the urgent need for larger increases in disability compensation for both disabled veterans and their dependents.

We also feel that the statutory award rates presently provided under subsection (1), (m), (n), (o) and (p) of section 314 of title 38, United States Code, should be liberalized as reflected in two resolutions passed at the BVA national convention in 1971. Copies of these resolutions are attached to this statement. Resolution No. 12 seeks a revision in the current method of rating impaired hearing in combination with blind

ness for disability compensation purposes. Resolution No. 28 requests the Congress to amend section 314 of title 38, United States Code, to grant compensation under subsection (o) for loss or loss of use of a hand or a leg when it occurs in combination with blindness.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the members of this subcommittee for the contributions you are making toward the development of much needed veteran legislation and for this opportunity to appear before you today.

(The full text of the previously mentioned resolutions follows:)

BVA NATIONAL CONVENTION-AUGUST 1971

RESOLUTION NO. 12

Resolved, That the Blinded Veterans Association does hereby respectfully request the Congress of the United States and the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs to take appropriate action to revise the current method of rating impaired hearing in combination with blindness for disability compensation purposes in order to eliminate current inequities in the disability rating structure.

RESOLUTION NO. 28

Resolved, That the Blinded Veterans Association does hereby respectfully request the Congress of the United States to amend Section 314 of Title 38 of the United States Code to grant compensation under Section 314 (o) for loss or loss of use of a hand or a leg when it occurs in combination with blindness.

Senator TALMADGE. Thank you, sir. Mr. Schnair, you stated you would like to make some comments.

Mr. SCHNAIR. Yes; I would, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity.

I simply wish to point out in the very beginning that S. 3338 in the upper brackets, the statutory rates, (1), (m), (n), and so on and so forth, the 10 percent does not go nearly as far as it would in the lower ones as pointed out in the written statement and by speakers who preceded me. The cost of living is that much higher for those individuals because they need so many more services rendered to them. An additional factor, whereas the wife can go out and supplement the income, she is not in a position to do so because she has to stay home attending to the blinded veteran, which is not taken into consideration in any form, shape or manner in this proposed legislation, and I therefore believe the rate should be much more than is presently contemplated for those categories.

To get back to the loss of hearing and the use of prosthesis in combination with blindness. They are rated by the Veterans' Administration in a manner similar as a sighted person would have which we think is highly inequitable because the person that is sighted that suffers loss of use of hearing or an arm or leg, has got his sight to supplement the loss of that particular ability. Furthermore, when it comes to a prosthesis such as an arm or leg, in order to make the maximum use of it one has to see where to direct it before you can use it with any kind of efficiency whatsoever which is obviously not the case with a blinded veteran.

Similarly, when he has an artificial lower extremity, one has to see where to put the foot down and there is not tactile feeling in there whatsoever and yet the Veterans' Administration goes ahead and rates them the same way as if they were not blind, and we feel that Congress should take this into consideration and take remedial measures and put them in paragraph (O) instead of where they are

at the present time. This is an oversight that has been perpetuated over the years and continues to be that way for no apparent reason whatsoever except that the people who rate the thing and the Veterans' Administration are in the habit of feeling, well, those blind veterans are so well rehabilitated they don't need any other additional training of any kind and they can do just as well with a prosthesis as without it.

That is not the case and we hope that the necessary recommendations would be made to rectify the situation.

Thank you.

Senator TALMADGE. Thank you. Your recommendations will be thoroughly reviewed by the committee in executive session. Are there any questions, Senator Hansen?

Senator HANSEN. No questions.

Senator TALMADGE. Thank you very much.

Mr. SCHNAIR. Thank you, gentlemen, have a pleasant day.

Senator TALMADGE. The next witness is Mr. Herald Stringer, national legislative director, the American Legion, accompanied by Mr. E. H. Golembieski, Director, Veterans' Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission.

STATEMENT OF HERALD STRINGER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION, THE AMERICAN LEGION, ACCOMPANIED BY E. H. GOLEMBIESKI, DIRECTOR, VETERANS' AFFAIRS AND REHABILITATION COMMISSION

Mr. STRINGER. Mr. Chairman and Senator Hansen, may I say first that the Legion appreciates this opportunity to be here this morning and we join with the other organizations in commending you and your subcommittee for holding these hearings and taking the initiative in considering those legislative measures that would improve the economic circumstances of those that have incurred injury while on duty in time of war.

Our principal witness is Mr. Edward Golembieski, Director of our Veterans' Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission. He is here with me and prepared to proceed.

Senator TALMADGE. You may proceed as you see fit.

Mr. GOLEMBIESKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In the interest of time I will summarize my remarks and request that the complete statement be incorporated in the record.

Senator TALMADGE. Without objection, the full statement will be inserted at this point.

(The prepared statement of Mr. Golembieski follows:)

STATEMENT OF E. H. GOLEMBIESKI, DIRECTOR, THE AMERICAN LEGION, NATIONAL VETERANS' AFFAIRS AND REHABILITATION COMMISSION

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: We appreciate the opportunity to come before you today to express the views of The American Legion on the several areas of concern to those who have incurred disease or injury while on active duty in the nation's Armed Forces in time of war.

You and your Committee are to be commended, Mr. Chairman, for taking the initiative in considering those legislative measures that would improve the economic circumstances of those who have disabling residuals of their serviceincurred disease or injury.

Although my prepared statement is directed to the mandates of The American Legion on compensation increases and other improvements in benefits and criteria for the war service veteran and his economic improvement or that of his dependent, I am prepared to express the organization's views on other measures under consideration by this Subcommittee.

Increased rates of disability compensation for wartime disabled veterans

Disability compensation is a monthly payment made by the Administrator of Veterans Affairs for a disability incurred in or aggravated in line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service.

Under the authority of 38 USC 355, the Administrator of Veterans Affairs adopts and applies a schedule of ratings of reduction in earning capacity from specific injuries or combination of injuries, including residuals of disease. These ratings shall be based, as far as practicable, upon the average impairments of earning capacity resulting from such injuries in civil occupations.

Although authority is given the Administrator to readjust the percentage rates of disability in accordance with experience, it is the responsibility of the Congress to periodically readjust the amount of the disability compensation rates so that they fulfill their fundamental purpose, that is, to assure that the disabled veteran has sufficient economic maintenance.

Disability compensation rates were last increased by Public Law 91-376, effective July 1, 1970. For that month the consumer price index in terms of the 1967 index was 116.7, and Bureau of Labor Statistics reported spendable average annual earnings of $6057 for production or supervisory workers in private manufacturing industries. By the end of February 1972, the consumer price index had advanced to $123.8, a change of about 6.1 percent. The spendable average annual wage of the production worker had increased to $6773 by the end of December 1971, an increase of about 11.8 percent.

Under the present rates of disability compensation, those veterans with 100 percent wartime disability receive $450 monthly, or $5400 annually. If these compensation rates are to continue to assure that the disabled veteran and his family have sufficient economic maintenance they must be increased.

In view of the advances in the consumer price index through February 1972 and the annual predicted increase, and delays incident to passage of legislation providing needed compensation rate increases, we urge consideration of our recommendation that the rates be increased to $500 monthly for 100 percent disability, and corresponding rate increases for those rated less than 100 percent and for those entitled to compensation in excess of 100 percent.

We agree with you, Mr. Chairman, that there is no way to adequately compensate a veteran for loss of ability to be a working, productive member of our society. Even with the rate increases we recommend, a 100 percent disabled veteran without other income will be at considerable economic disadvantage in a society where the spendable average annual income of a nonsupervisory production worker is $6773.

Increase the compensation payable under 38 U.S.C. 314 (k) to $75 monthly

In addition to other compensation payable, Section 314(k) now provides for an additional or statutory payment of $47 to those veterans who, as a result of service-connected disability, have suffered the anatomical loss or loss of use of one foot, or one hand, or both buttocks, or blindness of one eye, having only light perception, or complete aphonia with constant inability to communicate by speech, or deafness of both ears, with absence of both air and bone conduction.

As you know, there is no such thing as adequate compensation for those who have lost a limb, or an eye, or hearing, or ability to communicate with his fellow man. The statutory awards are not at all related to the average impairment rates projected in the VA disability rating schedule. They are supplementary to any compensation otherwise payable. Their legislative history reveals that discerning legislatures recognized that accompanying irreparable physical loss was a mental anguish and torment concomitantly suffered by those who have suffered these losses of limb, sight, hearing, and speech. To attempt to equate the disabilities of this group with loss of earning ability or capacity to follow a substantially gainful occupation is to do them a gross injustice they have lost something more than their ability to earn a living.

Additional compensation under 314(k) was increased from $42 to $47 monthly under PL 82-427, approved June 30, 1952. Although Congress has approved increases in those statutory awards payable under 314 (1), (m), (n), (o), (p),